Cliven Bundy walks free as federal judge dismisses Bundy Ranch standoff case

a reply to: SkeptiSchism

I have no way of proving this, like with links, but if you put some dots together I think this ties in with Hillary's emails and Uranium 1. Essentially, in short, European banks like UBS and DB were trying to digitize mineral rights and property in the US for the purpose of securitizing them and including them in a universal SDR database.

Very interesting -- thank you!

I'm sure it has something to do with the new investigation into Clinton and Uranium One. The Hammonds and the Oregon Standoff were all about the Uranium One deal, but I hadn't heard anything about digitizing mineral rights and scuritizing them.... I'd love to hear more? As best you can explain it?

What's SDR?

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Boadicea

Gah, see? I didn't know it was a five-count indictment, all I'd found was three charges for lying.

Out of curiosity, do any of the charges seem to be overcharging? Or under charging? They all seem fair to me. I get the feeling they were very careful to charge only what they could prove...

Not to worry, Bo is on the case! Thanks!

I'm just good at finding information! Maybe I missed my calling... hmmmm....

I wasn't aware that neither of the rounds the agent fired struck anybody, which makes me wonder why the hell he felt the need to lie about it. Especially to the FBI investigators in particular. I have to think that he might have faced some sort of internal discipline, but probably not been fired, much less charged for it.

I don't get it either. My best case scenario is that he had a twitchy trigger finger... worst case scenario is that he was trying to create an "incident." And I'm leaning towards the latter. Or maybe he's just a serial killer exploiting the perks of the job and was trying to kill Finicum -- or someone. I don't know. I've been trying to figure out if this agent is the officer that was positioned in the tree, but I haven't found anything specifically stating such. How else could he have hit the roof of the truck though?

Unless he fired his two rounds at a completely different time than the final encounter took place...

Now I'm intrigued... do tell? When? Where?

originally posted by: SailorJerry
Are they going to compensate that family for murdering in cold blood?

A civil suit has been filed and is pending.

I believe it's in the family's best interests to let the criminal cases play out before going forward with the civil suit, just in case something like this happens, which totally works in the family's favor... doesn't get much better than a judge condemning the prosecution and law enforcement for misconduct, eh?

My best bet is that the Feds will be begging to settle with the family now. They've been completely discredited in a criminal court, with a much higher level of evidence, and a jury will -- of course -- hold that against them in a civil trial. Yeah, I'm pretty sure the Feds are singing a much different tune these days in their negotiations with the family.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Boadicea

This is as perfect as justice needs to be.

There is no reason that a man--nor any person--be forced through a horrendous and lengthy public trial, facing conviction, with the conduct of the prosecutions and law enforcement is so blatantly unacceptable and illegal that it violates due process and makes a mockery of the judicial system.

Dismissing with prejudice is a perfect example of actual justice.

Your point is well taken. This was a perfectly just resolution from the judge for the very unjust situation at hand.

I would only say that in a perfect world, these charges never would have been brought in the first place. And, even more important, that the bad behavior of federal agents/agencies had never put Bundy in this position to begin with.

a reply to: Boadicea

Out of curiosity, do any of the charges seem to be overcharging? Or under charging? They all seem fair to me. I get the feeling they were very careful to charge only what they could prove...

In my opinion, no. You charge and prosecute based off what evidence you have, and I'd say they probably have solid evidence for those charges.

Now I'm intrigued... do tell? When? Where?

I honestly have no idea, it was just spitballing as to possible motive for lying about it. The way HRT operates, he had to have known it (the entire incident) was going to be "hot-washed" six ways to Sunday afterward, so I can't really understand why he'd lie about discharging his weapon unless there was something negligent or wildly outside policy about it. If he fired when the Trooper fired, there'd be no reason to lie about it because he could've just said there was a threat and he fired. So...why lie? We don't know what he specifically lied about, or how, so I'm just theorizing.

originally posted by: Boadicea

I would only say that in a perfect world, these charges never would have been brought in the first place. And, even more important, that the bad behavior of federal agents/agencies had never put Bundy in this position to begin with.

Ah, yes, that perfect world that doesn't exist. I agree with you, but alas.

I would also argue that, in a perfect world, the behavior of these agents would in turn be grounds for indictment--and honestly, the way the judge was talking, I wouldn't be overly surprised if that becomes a reality.

So everyone on the civilian side of this whole debacle has been exonerated? From Bundy to the Oregon standoff? Am I understanding correctly?

originally posted by: SkeptiSchism

originally posted by: Boadicea
It sure makes me wonder what all is going on behind the scenes, what with AG Sessions launching an investigation into the prosecutions actions, and a new U.S. Attorney appointed to replace Steve Myhre (the prosecutor who committed the misconduct and who had requested a new trial despite his prosecutorial misconduct). Interestingly enough, there is no mention of the new U.S. Attorney in the article or today's proceedings. The judge didn't have to mention the FBI at all, but she did -- and I assume for a reason. I just don't know what that reason is.

I have no way of proving this, like with links, but if you put some dots together I think this ties in with Hillary's emails and Uranium 1. Essentially, in short, European banks like UBS and DB were trying to digitize mineral rights and property in the US for the purpose of securitizing them and including them in a universal SDR database.

You betchya.....

a reply to: Boadicea

I've followed this event from day 1. Long time coming with this vindication. Makes me realize there are still federal judges out there who legitimately hold due process in high regards.

The MSM is a joke BTW.

a reply to: SailorJerry

What about all their time in court?

a reply to: Boadicea

Lynette Zang is covering it

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: SkeptiSchism

What's SDR?

Special Drawing Right, which would a proposed global reserve currency to replace the dollar.

a reply to: Shamrock6

...I honestly have no idea, it was just spitballing...

Ah... gotcha.

My only other thought is that he was the one who fired at the first stop on the road. And in that case he wouldn't have been the officer in the tree.

I don't think we'll know any time soon. The judge has put a gag order on the interested parties. So even if the grand jury transcript is released, I expect it will only be released to the defense attorneys.

I guess we'll have to wait until it goes to trial in May. There really isn't much public right now.

Without taking any sides, how the #?

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I would also argue that, in a perfect world, the behavior of these agents would in turn be grounds for indictment--and honestly, the way the judge was talking, I wouldn't be overly surprised if that becomes a reality.

Wow! Really? That would be refreshing -- to say the least! And coming from you, it gives me some hope.

I'm waiting to see where the Feds go with this. The judge's ruling is very encouraging. And as I noted, surprising for calling out the FBI agents specifically. What with the rest of the chaos with the DOJ/FBI in general, and the Clinton/Uranium One investigation in particular, I have to wonder how this is playing with everything else. I think the rot is far more insidious (and probably sinister) than we realize. There are several federal agencies all involved in and working together in the actions against the Bundys and the Hammonds and many other people. I'll be watching them -- ALL affected branches -- which is all of them! That's how dirty this whole thing is.

a reply to: Boadicea

Yup the rabbit hole is deep on this one, in the warren lie our property rights.

originally posted by: Chickensalad
So everyone on the civilian side of this whole debacle has been exonerated? From Bundy to the Oregon standoff? Am I understanding correctly?

Pretty much -- but not exactly.

A few of the defendants in both the Oregon Standoff and the Nevada Standoff plea bargained. Based on this court ruling, they can challenge that plea agreement in court.

I do believe there were a couple of Oregon defendants who were tried separately from the Bundys, and there were a couple of convictions (but I don't remember the charges). If so, they can also challenge those convictions in court.

In the first Nevada trial, two of the defendants were found guilty -- they can now challenge those convictions in court.

All of the defendants, including all the Bundys, who were not convicted in the first Nevada trial and carried over to face a new trial are those who are now Scot free -- all charges dropped and the state cannot re-file or re-try those charges.

a reply to: SkeptiSchism

Special Drawing Right, which would a proposed global reserve currency to replace the dollar.

Gotcha. Oh wow. Makes sense. All wars are bankster wars... apparently including the sagebrush wars.

Thank you. I'll be thinking about this and watching for more.

a reply to: Outlier13

It's a good thing indeed.

I knew there were a few of us still paying attention and keeping up with this. Thanks for being one of them!

a reply to: Boadicea

Not on CNN's front page at all.


I'm shocked.