Showing posts with label Bundy Trial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bundy Trial. Show all posts

Friday, May 29, 2020

FEDS GUILTY OF FLAGRANT MISCONDUCT in BUNDY CASE NOW SEEK to VIOLATE 5th AMENDMENT and RETRY CASE LIBERAL JUDGE THREW OUT


Due process. Whats due process to federal overlords hell-bent on driving a ranching family into the ground. I was standing ion my mother's home office when she began sobbing asking me to come to the computer and look. She showed me Ammon and Ryan Bundy's aunt who we learned later just survived cancer being tossed to the ground by a man in a tan uniform, others with German Shephards. In America. When we learned what was going on my mother looked up at me with tyears in her eyes and said... shall I book you a ticket son? She knew me well. 

The first thing I did when I got there was hand Clive the phone so she could say hello. He thanked her for sending me and I remember hearing her say, oh no, thank you for standing up for all of our rights. If we don't use em we will lose em. As for my son, wild horses couldn't keep him away.

I posted it on YouTube. They destroyed it. And my only copy of it as I was in the desert with limited computer storage. I trusted if I followed their guidelines I would be fine. They should be held accountable for that. Destroyed my memory. And of my now deceased mother during a historical moment. I stood with them then. I stood with them in Oregon, and I stand with them now. 

This is Oregon Live's news on the recent development:

Federal prosecutor urges appeals court to revive NV conspiracy case against Cliven Bundy, his sons and Ryan Payne

9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals


A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals took oral arguments via video conference Friday. Bottom row from left to right, Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth White, attorney Amy Cleary and attorney Larry Klayman.


0
shares
By Maxine Bernstein | The Oregonian/OregonLive


A federal prosecutor Friday urged an appeals panel to revive a conspiracy case against Cliven Bundy, his two sons and a fourth man, arguing that a Nevada judge’s dismissal was unwarranted.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth White argued that any documents or information prosecutors failed to share with the defendants’ lawyers wasn’t because of any “willfulness or reckless disregard.”

“There’s not a single one of these documents we withheld because we did not want the defense to have it,’’ White told a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals via a video conference hearing.


The government, White said, worked “tirelessly and tried diligently to comply with all of its obligations’’ and reviewed and produced hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, including 400 FBI reports. Prosecutors also kept an 87-page log itemizing tens of thousands of documents that they turned over, she said.


“We missed a few things,’’ White said. “We overlooked a document here or didn’t appreciate the relevance of a document there. What is clear is we fell short.’’


But she said the lapses didn’t warrant the extreme sanction of dismissing with prejudice the entire indictment against the senior Bundy, his two sons and Ryan Payne, ending the case for good.


If anything, the trial judge could have dismissed some of the charges and should have allowed the rest of the case to proceed, she said.


Cliven Bundy, sons Ammon Bundy and Ryan Bundy and Payne, a militia leader from Montana, were indicted on conspiracy and other allegations, accused of rallying armed supporters to stop federal officers from impounding Bundy cattle near Bunkerville.


Government authorities were acting on a court order filed after Cliven Bundy failed to pay grazing fees and fines for two decades. The outnumbered federal contingent retreated and halted the cattle roundup on April 12, 2014.


Their trial in Nevada was closely watched in Oregon, where Cliven Bundy was arrested as he traveled to visit his sons in a separate standoff, this one in January 2016 in eastern Oregon. Ammon and Ryan Bundy had led the armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

U.S. District Judge Gloria M. Navarro found that prosecutors engaged in a "deliberate attempt to mislead'' and made several misrepresentations to both the defense and the court about evidence related to a surveillance camera and snipers outside the Bundy ranch in early April 2014, as well as FBI threat assessments made in the case.


Attorney Amy Cleary, representing the Bundy brothers and Payne, argued that records disclosing the camera and snipers and a 2012 assessment that found the Bundys weren’t likely to be violent, would have directly bolstered her clients’ defense.


They were surrounded by snipers and afraid, she said, and weren’t providing false messaging to supporters about their fears.


Cleary said the judge gave prosecutors multiple opportunities, all the way through the start of the trial, to produce documents and explain why they hadn’t shared the information.


Attorney Larry Klayman, representing Cliven Bundy, urged the court to uphold the dismissal of the case. “What is absolutely correct is that there was flagrant abuse here,’’ he said. “Judge Navarro made the exact, correct decision.’’


Klayman referred to a report from whistleblower Larry Wooten, a lead Bureau of Land Management agent.


Wooten wrote in a memo that federal prosecutor Steven Myhre had removed him from the case after he raised concerns about far-reaching misconduct, recklessness and unrestrained antipathy by other federal agents toward the Bundy family.


Prosecutors shared the memo with defense lawyers as they were in the midst of the trial.


Had Wooten been called to testify, “That would be the nail in the coffin of this prosecution,’’ Klayman told the appeals panel.


Judge Paul J. Watford cut Klayman off, asking: “Why are you telling us all of this?’’


Watford said the Wooten allegations are “deeply disturbing. I grant you that,’’ but he pointed out the trial judge didn’t address it and it’s irrelevant in this appeal.


In court briefs, White characterized the Wooten memo as containing “lurid accusations of misconduct’’ against the Bureau of Land Management and said prosecutors turned it over to the defense two days after they received it from Associate Deputy Attorney General Andrew Goldsmith.


-- Maxine Bernstein

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

Monday, September 3, 2018

BUNDY RANCH MARTIAL LAW - BEHOLD A PALE HORSE




 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

re-upload

RTR TRUTH MEDIA
Resurrect the Republic Truth Radio Broadcast
http://RTRTruthMedia.blogspot.com
http://ResurrectTheRepublic.com

You can check us out on the following links
Donate - https://PayPal.me/RTRTruthMedia
Bitchute - https://www.bitchute.com/channel/7JV9ghYHumD3/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/RTRTruthMedia1776
twitter - https://twitter.com/tomlacovara

Music by Charlie Daniels
"Behold a Pale Horse"
From "Revelation: Dawn of Global Government"


Thursday, February 8, 2018

THE LAST FOUR BUNDY DEFENDANTS DISMISSED with PREJUDICE - PROSECUTION HAVING TEMPER TANTRUM

Dismissal Mark Your Calendars: February 8th – Bunkerville Standoff

Dismissal of Charges Against Bunkerville Defendants

by Shari Dovale

The Federal prosecutors filed a motion to dismiss the superseding indictment against four defendants in the Bunkerville Standoff on Wednesday, February 7th.

Defendants from Tier 2, the final group set for trial, include Dave H. Bundy, Mel D. Bundy, Joseph D. O’shaughnessy, And Jason D. Woods.

The case is, in essence, over for these four men, as the motion specifically asked for the indictment to be dismissed with prejudice. This means there is no chance for the government to come back and attempt to try them for the same charges.

In light of the Judge’s order to dismiss the charges against the previous group of defendants last month, it is expected that Judge Gloria Navarro will grant this motion quickly.










The government did cite their reasoning to include another filing they made today.

The prosecutors filed a ‘Motion To Reconsider Orders Dismissing Indictment With Prejudice’ against the Tier 1 defendants, including Cliven Bundy, his sons Ammon and Ryan, and Activist Ryan Payne.

In this motion, the government admits to the snipers and the cameras:

There has never been any dispute that armed federal officers positioned themselves on public land so they could surveil the Bundy ranch to watch for signs of impending interference with the operation, and that at least for a time, they used a camera to assist with that surveillance.

However, the prosecution does not address the fact that they called these an “Urban Legend” and implied they were a fantasy made up by the defendants. Stating in court that the defendants were on a “fishing expedition”, they made every attempt to hide this evidence from the Court.

Judge Navarro gave the prosecution everything they wanted for months, actually years, until the truth was forced to come out. She ruled against the defendants at every turn. She finally tried to make things right last month when she ruled for the dismissal with prejudice.

The court was correct when it ruled that the prosecution violated the Brady rules multiple times. This seems to be one last-ditch effort on the part of AUSA Steven Myhre and company to save face.

Quite a lot is riding on this indictment for the government, including hundreds of millions of dollars. They must find a way to justify this bad behavior. Let’s hope that Judge Navarro does not fall for their fairy tales once again.

Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: paypal.me/RedoubtNews

Tuesday, January 30, 2018

NEXT TIER of BUNDY DEFENDANTS with BRYAN HYDE



RTR TRUTH MEDIA REPORTS:

Published on Jan 30, 2018
Looks like I'll be headed back to Vegas next week for the latest developments in the Bundy trial. Hoping for another full dismissal with prejudice. The next tier of defendants in the Bundy Ranch case have a crucial hearing scheduled next week in Las Vegas.

     - Bryan Hyde

Special Thanks the J Grady YouTube Channel
From RTR TRUTH MEDIA

 Copyright Disclaimer: Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

Friday, December 29, 2017

Washington Post Quotes Confidential FBI Informant as Anti-Bundy Source

Click link below to listen to the show - all related links and materials discussed are below.





- Claim of Anti-Gvt. FALSE
- UnAmerican attack upon their Faith 
- use of Informant who is virulent and completely biased in saving her reputation, and whom has engaged in a stalking like crusade against the Bundy's and all supporters - while touting "her faith", engages in name calling, insults, lies, and attacking their beliefs. This is the same woman who was reported to have been kicked out of the Federal Courthouse and who has stalked and instigated scenes out front of the Federal Court. She has been caught on film in full provocateur mode, many of which have been horrified by her behavior, some who could not come back in fear of an incident, as they reported to citizen journalists on the ground covering the trial. 

UPDATE: by Bryan Hyde on the Bundy Case


Support this broadcast:

Let's see what Government representatives had to say about the BLM and see if his assertion comports with Cliven Bundy's allegations - 


Used as main source material of Newsweek and the Washington Post is the Southern Poverty Law Center - In this we will kill two birds with one stone and promote Prager University with their SPLC CLIP:


Non directly related evidence of how unlawful government and opposition to same is NOT anti-government activity. But employees from within the Federal government are ostracized and intimidated, even persecuted under "color of law".
Special Agent Taylor Johnson on DHS Corruption:


SPLC - The Real Hate Group







Source Articles:
Washington Post

Newsweek

Operation Mockingbird

Other links discussed on the show: 

PROOF of the LIES of the MAIN STREAM MEDIA

Bundy Trial Prosecution Proven to be Persecution of Misconduct and Lawbreaking Itself

Bundy Trial Weekly Update
Prosecution Found Guilty

by Terry Noonkester

The last days of the Bundy trial were no longer about the protest between the ranchers and BLM over grazing rights.  The courts attention was drawn to how the prosecution and the agency’s they represented have disregarded the Constitutional rights of the accused.

On December 20th, 2017, Judge Navarro presided over a hearing for the USA v Cliven Bundy trial to give her decision on the defense’s motions for dismissal due to prosecutorial misconduct.  The prosecutors committed Brady violations when they failed to turn over evidence favorable to the defense.

Judge Navarro spent nearly two hours detailing six Brady violations made by the prosecution team.  The team is comprised of Acting U.S. Attorney, Steven Myhre, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Daniel Schiess and Nadia Ahmed.  Myhre had been a federal prosecutor for more than 25 years. Navarro said the evidence withheld was “material” to the defense case and that each of the prosecution’s six “willful” violations resulted in due process violations.

One prosecution violation was in regard to the surveillance camera or cameras that captured images, and possibly audio, of the Bundy home, and at other times, surveillance of two other locations.  The defense had repeatedly asked for any documentation regarding the surveillance, but the prosecution denied the existence of these camera’s until a government witness, U.S. Park Service Chief Investigator, Mary Hinson, testified to their existence.

Another violation was about the existence of sniperspositioned around the Bundy home.  The defense needed the FBI reports on these snipers to rebut the governments charges that claimed the Bundy’s and Ryan Payne made false claims that snipers were surrounding the Bundy home.

These FBI reports on snipers were denied and suppressed.  The records now show there were at least 197 paramilitary personnel at the Bundy Ranch in April 2014. There were pictures of snippers on the high ground near the ranch.  The paramilitary personnel were from the Las Angeles SWAT, The Las Vegas Metro SWAT and the FBI Hostage Rescue Team along with the BLM law enforcement and their ‘contract cowboys’.

There were several threat assessment reports made by the FBI throughout an extended timeframe of several years.  The prosecution claimed the Bundy family was assessed as being dangerous, but failed to make the reports available to the defense.  The Bundy’s and several supporters were denied bail because of these assessments until the prosecution’s witness, Mary Jo Rugwell, former head of  the BLM district office in southern Nevada, testified that the reports classified the Bundy’s as not a threat or as a low threat.  These assessments were then released to Judge Navarro, who then ruled that the defendants could be released from prison, to be monitored with ankle bracelets at host homes in Las Vegas.  The defendants may have spent 20 months in prison because of false statements made by the prosecution.

There was also a BLM assessment that grazing had not harmed the desert tortoise.  This refutes the governments claims that the cattle roundup was done to protect the tortoise.

Navarro repeatedly referred to the date that production of the evidence was required as October 1st, 2017; the discovery date for this trial.  Although the withheld evidence was also needed by the defense in the first two Cliven Bundy et al trials, violations for those trials are not covered by violations confirmed in this trial.

Navarro declared a mistrial because of the government’s “willful failure to disclose information” to the defense. She said; “A fair trial at this point is impossible.”

Ryan Bundy asked the Judge if that meant all the defendants would be released.  She told him that he would have to go through Pre-trial Services to  get any modification of his release.  Ryan asked if Todd Engel, and Greg Burleson would be released.  She said that was not up to her, a jury had convicted them.  She made it clear that the first two Bundy Trials in Las Vegas were not covered by this mistrial.

The jury was then brought into the courtroom for the first time in 9 days,  Judge Navarro told them that there had been a lot of new evidence in the trial; 3,300 pages of new evidence.  The attorneys would need a lot of extra time to go through all the new evidence so the trial had to be declared a mistrial because it was going to take too long.  She thanked them for their services and sacrifices several times and dismissed them as jurors.  She never mentioned that the prosecution was the party late with the evidence, nor did she say anything about Brady violations.

The procedure to be followed now is for lawyers for the defense and the prosecution to file briefs explaining to Judge Navarro how they think the trial should be concluded.  The prosecution would normally try to convince the judge that the case should be retried. The defense wants the judge to dismiss the case with prejudice; meaning all charges would be dropped and the prosecution would be barred from trying the case again.  December 29th is the deadline for the lawyers to file their arguments regarding how the trial should end.  Navarro has set the date for her decision as January 8th, 2018 at the courthouse.

At the end of the hearing on December 20th, Navarro instructed the prosecution to go through all the evidence that was covered by a protective order and remove any evidence that does not need to be under such a restrictive court order.  The judge also requested that any unnecessary redactions be removed.  The only sanctions imposed on the prosecution from Navarro’s court will be the mistrial or dismissal of the case.  Navarro has also followed court protocol to set a “calendar call” for February 15th,  and a new trial date for February 26th, 2018; but these dates are not expected to be needed.

After the courtroom was adjourned, the defendants were able to visit with the jurors.  Ammon said all the jurors he talked to were friendly and some wished to visit the ranch.  Some jurors said that if they had gone into deliberation at that point, the verdict would have been ‘not guilty’, one saying that he could see what the government was doing to them.  The Bundy’s, their defense team, supporters and even a few jurors met outside the courthouse main entrance.  The jurors had been impressed by Ryan Bundy’s representation of himself, one of the jurors calling it ‘awesome’.

Bret Whipple, the attorney for Ammon Bundy said; “All we need to do is point out her findings that the evidence was ‘material,’ and the violations were ‘willful,’ and attach the Chapman case. In my mind that seals the deal…I’m confident we’ll get a mistrial with prejudice. One step at a time. We’re getting close.”  The Chapman case, like the Bundy case, was headed by Steven Myhre and ended in a mistrial due to the prosecutions failure to disclose exculpatory evidence.

Judge Navarro has not considered the new allegations about prosecutorial misconduct that were made public in an email leaked to Washington State Representative Matt Shea on December 14, 2017.  The email was written by the former lead investigator of the Bundy case within the BLM, Agent Larry Wooten.  Wooten wrote of cooperation between his supervisor and prosecutor Steven Myhre to withhold evidence and his own dismissal as case investigator after his own failed efforts to supply evidence to Myhre.

Larry Klayman, a former Justice Department prosecutor and the founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch, sent a message to Attorney General Jeff Sessions on December 21, 2017. “In the last week, through an ethically troubled BLM whistleblower who came forward as a matter of conscience, Larry “Clint” Wooten, it was also disclosed that BLM and the FBI had put the Bundys on a “kill list,” mocked and disparaged their Mormon faith, and bragged about assaulting and waging a violent invasion of their land, as well as harming them.

To make matters ethically and legally worse, Myhre and his staff also suppressed this whistleblower report documenting BLM and FBI gross misconduct and indeed criminal behavior. In short, your prosecutors in Nevada not just condoned the hiding and destruction of evidence that could lead to my client’s acquittal, but they themselves engaged in obstruction of justice through a cover-up. Importantly, Myhre and his staff committed crimes in furtherance of attempting to falsely convict Cliven Bundy. Incredibly, if convicted on all counts, Cliven and his sons would be sentenced to mandatory life imprisonment.”

Klayman’s letter continued; “…it is incumbent that you also direct the Department’s OPR and the IG to now conduct an ethics investigation and mete out appropriate strong disciplinary sanctions against Myhre and his staff, as well as the involved complicit FBI agents”.  Klayman has requested an investigation of the Bundy prosecution several times in the last year, and filed formal complaints against Sessions, the Inspector General (IG), and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) when an investigation was not conducted in a timely manner.

Spokesman for the United States Justice Department, Ian Prior, said Jeff Sessions takes this issue very seriously and has personally directed a review and report of the case against Cliven Bundy.  When a judge makes a finding of misconduct by a prosecutor, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility investigates and determines if discipline is warranted. That can range from a reprimand to a suspension.  At this point, it is even possible for the government to call an end to the case.  It is disturbing that Sessions used the phrase “review and report” rather than investigation.

Not included in the violations committed by the prosecution are any issues that had not “ripened” when Judge Navarro declared a mistrial.  The ripeness refers to the readiness for litigation; “a claim is not ripe for adjudication if it rests upon contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or not occur at all”.  Although the ‘Wooten materials’ make many allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, there must be an investigation and possibly litigation before there can be sanctions or other punishments.

Also not covered is another violation in regards to testimony given by Mary Jo Rugwell regarding the Bundy’s water rights.  It seems Rugwell has perjured herself when she testified that she knew nothing about the Bundy’s water rights, but evidence was found that she had previously tried to have those water rights cancelled.

Defense lawyers said the violations in this Bundy trial are more extensive, involving thousands of pages of documents deliberately withheld.

At a roundtable discussion later in the day of the hearing, Ammon Bundy described how the prosecution of the Hammond family in Oregon paralleled the Bundy case in Nevada.  Ammon said the Hammonds did not have the benefit of a good defense team, so they are in prison.  He continued by saying that we need to act to get the Hammonds out of prison now.

Cliven Bundy is still ‘resisting release’ by not accepting an ankle bracelet monitoring device and a halfway house as a condition of release, and he is also insisting that all the men that came to his ranch in his defense be freed before him.

This article is offered to all other media under the Creative Commons License, when proper credit is given to Terry Noonkester, The Roseburg Beacon and Redoubt News.

 

Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: paypal.me/RedoubtNews

Please go to Redoubt News and share and spread their information. And donate to them to support the hard work they do. We commend them !

RTR

Sunday, December 24, 2017

GOVT ENTRAPMENT of BUNDYS - MORE EVIDENCE REVEALED


The Bombshells Keep on Coming as Bunkerville Trial Gets Underway

Federal Prosecutors are being exposed for their underhanded tactics and entrapment setup of the Bunkerville defendants.
During a recent evidentiary hearing, Daniel Love (the Special Agent in Charge of the 2014 Bundy cattle roundup operation) called out Daniel Bogden, then-US Attorney for Nevada, as being the decision maker for the release of the cattle. Love has no problem naming names these days as he is visibly angry over being fired this past summer due to his misconduct identified by the U.S. Department of Interior’s Inspector General.
The jury in the Bundy case was selected more than a week ago, but the courtroom has been occupied with evidentiary and detention issues.  On Monday, November 13, the audience spent most of the day in the hallway as Judge Navarro held “sealed” hearings with the defendants, their lawyers, and the prosecutors.
Such secret motions and proceedings have taken up an increasing proportion of the Bundy case in the past weeks.  There are more questions than answers regarding these secret motions and hearings, including: are they even legal?
Every day brings new startling revelations.  It has recently come to light that there are photos in the discovery which show the prosecutors in the case near the scene of the 2014 standoff, prior to the first escalation of events.
The photos were apparently taken on April 3, 2014. This was 3 days before Dave Bundy’s arrest and well before any protesters arrived.  The photos show Assistant U.S. Attorney Nadia Ahmed (now one of the prosecutors of the Bundys) as well as U.S. Magistrate Judge Ferenbach at the impound site.  Also present, apparently, are other members of the U.S. Attorneys office, including possibly even then-US Attorney Daniel Bogden.
The fact that this photo is part of the sealed discovery goes to show the importance the government places on their back-door dealings which led up to the prosecutions. Why must everything be hidden from the citizens?
READ MORE CLICK - REDOUBT NEWS HERE

Sunday, December 17, 2017

The ExtraJudicial Plot to Kill Bundy Protesters EXPOSED Now Undeniable


The Extra Judicial Plot to Kill Bundy Protesters EXPOSED - Now Undeniable - 
Where is the Main Stream Media Coverage of this?
Whistleblower Reveals The Kill Book
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?
Quoted from article by Gary Hunt - 
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.