Predicto Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 As an actual constitutional attorney, I always get a good guffaw out of reading KrisAnne Hall's legal "analysis." It's nothing but a bunch of empty slogans, wishful thinking and bashing of the evil elites who actually know something about law and the Constitution. No wonder her target audiences love her so. She feeds into their "all opinions are equal so I can believe whatever I want" mindset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted March 11, 2017 Author Share Posted March 11, 2017 http://www.opb.org/news/series/burns-oregon-standoff-bundy-militia-news-updates/verdict-second-trial-guilty-patrick-ryan-ehmer-thorn/ Quote 2 Occupiers Found Guilty Of Conspiracy For Roles In Oregon Standoff by Conrad Wilson Follow and Amanda Peacher Follow OPB | March 9, 2017 11:35 a.m. | Updated: March 10, 2017 6:31 p.m. | Portland A federal jury has convicted occupiers Jason Patrick and Darryl Thorn on felony conspiracy charges for their roles in last year’s armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Defendants Duane Ehmer and Jake Ryan were acquitted of conspiracy, but convicted on lesser charges. Patrick, Thorn, Ehmer and Ryan were considered less prominent players in last year’s 41-day occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in a remote part of Eastern Oregon’s high desert. The armed protest began Jan. 2, 2016, and ended when the final four occupiers surrendered to the FBI on Feb. 11 during a dramatic conclusion that spanned several hours and was broadcast live on the internet. The verdict in this second trial comes after three weeks of testimony and more than two days of deliberations. *Click Link For more* Down in Vegas: http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/bundy-blm/cameraman-testifies-during-bunkerville-standoff-trial Quote Cameraman testifies during Bunkerville standoff trial By JENNY WILSON LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL A media cameraman who tried, unsuccessfully, to mediate the Bunkerville standoff gave hours of testimony Wednesday while federal prosecutors played shaky, handheld footage that provided a more dynamic view of the protests than anything previously disclosed on dashcam recordings. The government called Dennis Michael Lynch as a witness after fighting ferociously earlier in the week to keep the footage he captured out of court. Defense attorneys Monday had tried to use some of the videos to rebut a federal agent’s testimony, and prosecutors’ decision to call Lynch reflected a strategic attempt to control the narrative as they continue to present their case against six men accused of conspiring with rancher Cliven Bundy. *Click Link for More* Info on Domestic Terrorism https://t.e2ma.net/webview/kumijb/9af22fd2399cce1c74429df6b754272d 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 I don't know why we waste court time on these radical islamic terrorists..they aint entitled to american rights... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BornaSkinsFan83 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 He finished it up with, "If you're here for me and my wife's help-wanted ad, I'll meet me with you behind the barn in 20 minutes." (i have faith someone knows what I'm referencing.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Quote U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro told federal prosecutors they had willfully violated evidence rules in failing to turn over pertinent documents to the defense, adding that “the failure is prejudicial” to ensuring a fair trial. Imagine that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 1 hour ago, twa said: Imagine that Tbey illegally staged an armed occupation of Federal property...and were on tv with the whole thing. Claiming innocence at this point is absurd. Defending them is idiotic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Just now, AsburySkinsFan said: Tbey illegally staged an armed occupation of Federal property...and were on tv with the whole thing. Claiming innocence at this point is absurd. Defending them is idiotic. So you are defending prosecutorial abuse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, twa said: So you are defending prosecutorial abuse? Are you saying they’re innocent? Them claiming that they’re innocent is an absurdity, and YOU know it. But you just want to be the resident contrarian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Just now, AsburySkinsFan said: Are you saying they’re innocent? Them claiming that they’re innocent is an absurdity, and YOU know it. But you just want to be the resident contrarian. I'm saying the govt clearly abused their authority.....indisputably even. That does not equal innocent, but it might be true on how they got to the armed resistance point. I'm a saved sinner, ain't nobody innocent in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Now you want to defend armed resistance against Federal government. Exactly what won’t you defend? Do you have a list, or is it more of a sliding scale? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 6 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said: Exactly what won’t you defend? It's not so much a what as it is a who. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 15 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: It's not so much a what as it is a who. Anyone not a Republican, or some wannabe free range vigilante cowboy living his wild west fantasies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 1 hour ago, AsburySkinsFan said: Now you want to defend armed resistance against Federal government. Exactly what won’t you defend? Do you have a list, or is it more of a sliding scale? I though I was just ****ing about govt overreach. But If you are serious about resisting armed is the way....they certainly are. Of course you have a high chance of dying or prison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Are they guilty or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Just now, AsburySkinsFan said: Are they guilty or not? Of what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Uhh duh gee George I dun know...armed occupation of Federal land, resisting arrest. Come on twa you’re not stupid, I get that you love being the contrarian but it was televised! The whole damn thing! So stop it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 I guess we will find out if the govt quits subverting justice long enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 55 minutes ago, twa said: I guess we will find out if the govt quits subverting justice long enough. How ‘bout we just watch the hours and hours of video that was on tv? Only idiots defend idiots who’s crimes were literally broadcast on 24 hour network news for days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 How about we take em out and shoot em? Seems simpler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 I'd settle for sterilization. Too many stupid people reproducing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 There's some irony in the Bundys being granted a mistrial by the Federal system they so disdain. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 1 hour ago, twa said: How about we take em out and shoot em? Seems simpler. Please, these people reject the authority of the US government, the reject authority of Federsl judges and courts but now they want to manipulate the system to get them off on the crimes they committed. Only you would think that’s justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now