It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Which charge made them terrorists? As far as I know, the only ones in legal hot water right now are the Hammonds, who do not support the occupation and are not charged with terrorism.
The Government needed them to be "Terrorists" so they added another charge.
It would seem that, at the least, they are trespassing on federal property.
I have to ask though, are these Militia abiding by the LAW? State Laws? Federal Laws? '
originally posted by: Paschar0
I simply want to voice my support for this effort. We watch daily how police murder citizens, steal property, abuse after abuse and absolutely nothing is done. Police mock citizens when they mention the constitution, they laugh at you filming them (or much worse). This has been a long time coming and I hope thousands show up to put government thugs in their place.
A federal judge wanted to make an unfair example out of the ranchers by extending their sentences...really? What a piece of garbage.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Stormdancer777
I'm with you.
The Hammonds aren't.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain
Which charge made them terrorists? As far as I know, the only ones in legal hot water right now are the Hammonds, who do not support the occupation and are not charged with terrorism.
The Government needed them to be "Terrorists" so they added another charge.
It would seem that, at the least, they are trespassing on federal property.
I have to ask though, are these Militia abiding by the LAW? State Laws? Federal Laws? '
They were not charged with terrorism. And there is no double jeopardy because they were not retried for the same crime. Resentencing is not double jeopardy.
The argument is that the Feds are carrying out 'double jeopardy' by charging these men again with "Terrorism" after the arson charge and demanding they serve more time.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain
They were not charged with terrorism. And there is no double jeopardy because they were not retried for the same crime.
The argument is that the Feds are carrying out 'double jeopardy' by charging these men again with "Terrorism" after the arson charge and demanding they serve more time.
Here:
www.justice.gov...
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain
They were not charged with terrorism. And there is no double jeopardy because they were not retried for the same crime. Resentencing is not double jeopardy.
The argument is that the Feds are carrying out 'double jeopardy' by charging these men again with "Terrorism" after the arson charge and demanding they serve more time.
And again, it is the Hammonds who were convicted and they do not support the occupation.
Here:
www.justice.gov...
By law, arson on federal land carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence.