Independent media, news reporting, analysis, opinion, forensic historical research presentations. From a Libertarian to Anarcho-Libertarian Anti-Federalist perspective.
(Law enforcement officials gather in Bend for a March 2016 press conference, where they announced that the fatal Jan. 26, 2016, shooting of refuge occupation spokesman Robert "LaVoy" Finicum/Beth Nakamura)
-- State police went along with unusual demands by the FBI to interview the agents from the Hostage Rescue Team as a group and not record them.
Conducting a group interview of officers -- whether they fired shots or witnessed a shooting -- is unheard of, state police detective Scott Hill testified.
But Hill said he agreed to the ultimatum because he was afraid none of the agents would talk if he didn’t. Hill was part of a state task force, led by the Deschutes County Sheriff’s Office, investigating the shooting.
The reason given why an FBI supervisor demanded the group interview in February 2016 came out at the end of the trial.
In his closing argument, defense attorney David Angeli told jurors that the agents didn’t have legal representation with them since they were so far from home, FBI headquarters in Quantico, Virginia. They apparently wanted safety in numbers without a lawyer there.
But it’s likely that the Hostage Rescue Team agents consulted with a legal representative from the FBI Agents Association and could have had someone on the phone for any interview or flown out to help them.
“Had I known earlier there was a serious question about who shot and whether HRT agents were implicated, I would have involved the FBI’s Inspection Division for the benefit of all involved,’’ said Bretzing, Oregon’s FBI agent in charge at the time.
Investigators from the FBI’s Inspection Division wouldn’t have agreed to a group interview, he said.
The Hostage Rescue Team is reportedly considering requiring a legal representative travel with the team on its missions.
(The truck refuge occupation spokesman Robert "LaVoy" Finicum was driving on Jan. 26, 2016 when he raced from a police stop and swerved into a snowbank to avoid a police roadblock on U.S. 395/ Deschutes County Sheriff's Office)
-- State police, ordinarily required to wear body cameras, agreed not to wear the cameras during the arrests of the occupation leaders to protect the identities of the FBI Hostage Rescue Team agents.
State police detectives also normally record interviews of officers who might be involved in a shooting.
However, they didn't the night of the shooting when questioning the FBI Hostage Rescue Team members, again at the FBI's request, or during the February interview of the agents.
No one testified why the FBI didn’t want their interviews recorded.
The FBI typically doesn’t record such interviews. If the FBI’s Inspection Division had done the interview, the federal investigator would write up a report of the agent’s statement, the agent could make changes and then swear that it was true, providing a signed sworn statement.
In this case, the Hostage Rescue Team agents had someone who wasn’t at the scene write a “communal’’ FBI report on what they saw or did that day.
(Greg Bretzing, Oregon's FBI special agent in charge, at a March 2016 news conference, announcing the investigation into FBI Hostage Rescue Team agents)
-- Astarita and his colleagues on the Hostage Rescue Team each testified that they did a standard security items check, walking around the shooting scene to look for remnants of flash-bang grenades such as pins and other personal gear after Finicum was killed.
But a former head of the FBI’s training program for new agents -- who also trained Astarita in 2005 -- said nothing should have been moved at the shooting scene. And if it was moved for safety reasons, he said, the shooting investigators should have been told.
The investigators testified that they learned that FBI agents scoured the scene only after the fact by watching video from FBI planes monitoring the operation. Further, other flash-bang grenades and pins remained at the scene after the video caught the suspected agents bending down and picking things up at the scene, according to trial testimony.
Bretzing, Oregon’s head FBI agent at the time, testified that the search was unusual and concerning.
(The bullet strikes to Finicum's truck / Court exhibit)
-- Shooting investigators could find only two shell casings of eight shots fired at the roadblock. And the FBI didn’t turn over their guns for immediate examination.
Both of those things hampered the investigation, prosecutors said.
Had an FBI agent fired his rifle that day, the agent is required to alert a supervisor, who would call out the bureau’s Shooting Incident Response Team to investigate, seize the weapon and conduct a full inquiry into the shooting.
None of the agents’ rifles were immediately examined by the FBI or the shooting investigators because none of the agents said they fired that night.
After the shooting investigators found an unaccounted-for bullet hole in the roof of Finicum’s truck, FBI supervisors again asked all the Hostage Rescue Team agents if they had fired any rounds.
Astarita and his boss who was also at the roadblock, supervisory agent B.M., said they independently examined their own rifles in their 10-person tent at the tactical operations center at Burns airport a day or two after the shooting. They didn't find anything unusual to report, they testified. B.M.'s identity also was shrouded because the FBI said he was on active duty with the Army Reserves, involved in special operations.
Astarita was acquitted on charges that he lied when he denied taking two shots at Finicum’s truck at the roadblock after it crashed into a snowbank. One bullet hit the roof of the truck and the other missed as Finicum got out of the truck with his hands up at the roadblock, investigators said. No one has acknowledged taking the shots.
Officer 1 fired three times at Finicum’s truck as it bore down on the roadblock and then two shots that struck Finicum when he walked away from the truck. Officer 2 fired one bullet that hit Finicum.
(FBI tactical gear/ FBI)
-- FBI supervisory agent Mike Ferrari testified that the FBI recently has standardized how its SWAT operators load their rifle magazines. They now must put in 28 bullets.
Ferrari said the change didn’t stem from this case but because of a number of incidents throughout the FBI. He did not explain what those incidents involved.
- interjection by RTR Truth Media... we have the technology that each bullet an officer loads could be marked by adding nano-dye.
In this case, none of the FBI’s rifles were examined by investigators the night of the shooting.
The number of rounds initially loaded into Officer 1’s rifle became a point of contention during the trial. The defense argued Officer 1 could have taken the two disputed shots; Officer 1 said he loaded his rifle magazine with 29 bullets and 24 were remaining, confirming his account that he fired five shots that day and not the two disputed rounds. The defense countered that Officer 1’s rifle capacity is 31 bullets.
This is why we came from all over the nation. In this video you will see the martial law force brought to bear upon the Bundy family, the protesters, and everyone in the general area with documented evidence from the trial and from boots on the ground. I for one do not regret being there. Because #ItMattersHowYouStand
The Extra Judicial Plot to Kill Bundy Protesters EXPOSED - Now Undeniable - Where is the Main Stream Media Coverage of this?SAC Dan Love, Bunkerville Stadoff 2014 (photo by Shannon Bushman, used with permission)The Kill Book
“The president, a politician, Republican or Democrat, should never get to decide someone’s death by flipping through some flash cards and saying, ‘You want to kill him? Yeah, let’s go ahead and kill him’.” — Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), on CNN’s “State Of The Union,” Feb. 10.
The recently released 17 page report by whistleblower and lead investigator, Larry Wooten, details wide ranging misconduct by prosecutors and by BLM and other government actors. Among the accusations made by Wooten, was reference to a “kill book” kept by SAC Dan Love in which he bragged about causing the suicides of different individuals including Dr. Redd.
Beyond the suicides, it is unclear to what extent the “kill book” identified other people, including the Bundys and their supporters, as targets for assassination. There have been claims that, once all the discovery is released, not just the Wooten report, that more evidence will show that the Bundys and others were targeted for assassination.
One thing that has been confirmed is the use of snipers and the implied intent to assassinate. We already know how “trigger happy” the FBI was in shooting Vicky Weaver, while holding an infant child in her arms, at Ruby Ridge. There is probable cause to believe that the snipers, seen at the Bundy ranch, could have easily killed somebody associated with the Bundy cause.
Additionally, there is mounting evidence that a FBI sharpshooter fired at LaVoy Finicum and/or his passengers in an attempt to “execute extreme prejudice” and rid themselves of the problem that was growing like a virus. US Senator Ron Wyden, comparing the Malheur standoff to a virus, said that it was, “a situation where the virus was spreading,” and action needed to be taken.
One normally deals with a spreading virus by killing it. Were the assassination of Finicum, the attempted assassination of his passengers and the use of snipers at Bunkerville, all part of a government remedy to eradicate the virus through orders to kill?
Ammon Bundy, in a recent video, talks about some of the contents of the whistleblower report and how the FBI and the BLM put “x’s” through the pictures of Cliven Bundy and showed a disrespect for life.
EXTREME PREJUDICE
A common practice by government is to label something with words that make them a euphemism, meaning to downplay the seriousness of something by giving it a better sounding name. A euphemism for assassination or kill orders is to “execute extreme prejudice”.
This term is used in reference to the government policy of assassinating enemies of the state, foreign or domestic.
The point I want to make is that, accusations and claims being made in the case of Bundy, Finicum and their supporters, regarding kill books or kill lists are not far fetched , nor are they a product of wacko conspiracy nuts, but fit a much bigger and far reaching policy by the US government to use assassination (murder) as a way to deal with people that they, a small group of decision makers, may consider “terrorists” or “virus”.
Senator Dennis Kucinich said that, “It doesn’t take too much of a stretch” to believe that the government policy to terminate terrorists in other parts of the world could also happen on US soil and against US citizens. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKdA9MqQctU (at 4:00 minutes)
We have heard Senator Harry Reid refer to the Bundys and supporters as “domestic terrorists”.
Once the term “terrorist” attaches to someone, whether foreign or domestic, it seems to give the government added justification to “reach out and touch someone” in the form of a drone missile or sniper bullet or some other form of “extreme prejudice”.
THE DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS
The above referenced video with Kucinich discusses how the constitutional rights to due process are being denied as the government seeks and destroys what they deem to be enemies of the state and then terminates them. The enormous injustice that is being perpetrated, not only against US citizens, is also against other human beings who don’t happen to be US citizens.
Our founders talked about inalienable and natural rights, rights that come to us for the simple fact of being human. The constitution was meant to not only protect people with US citizenship, but it was a model of conduct towards all mankind.
Denial of due process means that there are no checks and balances, none of the protections found in the Bill of Rights. Instead, somebody, often the POTUS, makes a unilateral decision to take somebody out, to take their life without a trial, without witnesses and cross examination and all the protections that we are supposed to have in a court of law. All that is bypassed with a drone missile or a sniper bullet.
The advantages and convenience of assassination are huge. By taking someone out, the government and their agencies are spared all the publicity, energy, expense and messiness of trials and investigations. The benefit of an assassination far outweighs its risk.
DOES THE DRONE CULTURE BLEED OVER TO THE DOMESTIC POLICIES OF FEDERAL AGENCIES?
In an undated email from Larry Wooten to Andrew D. Goldsmith, Associate Deputy Attorney General, National Criminal Discovery Coordinator, Wooten writes of many misdeeds in the entire Gold Butte Impound Operation, that being the operation that unfolded near Bunkerville, Nevada, back in early April 2014.
In a cover email, the eighteenth page, to Steven Myhre, United States Attorney for the Nevada District, in a forwarded email, the 17 page emails is included for a total of 18 pages. Wooten explains in the cover email that his superiors, his chain of command, would not deal with what he had presented to them. I’m not quite sure why he sent it to Myhre, since Myhre is implicated in the information, along with any others.
As I read the email, I realized that this was going to be a rather lengthy article. There were, Wooten’s own words, “Law Enforcement Supervisory Misconduct and Associated Cover-ups as well as Potential Unethical Actions, Malfeasance and Misfeasance by United States Attorney’s Office”, that I decided that I could only cover the more significant ones, and then provide the entire email for those that wanted to know more.