Some more wisdom from Gavin Seim......
Some more wisdom from Gavin Seim......
So, Gavin Seim is an ok fella? I, for some reason, thought he was a govt stooge/informant. Anything to that?
I guess it all depends on where you live. For example, I can support LE in my home state but would NEVER support Oregon State Troopers.
Also, because the judge has taken over the prosecution I take exception to her dubious actions as well. But I know Judges from Fed, State Supreme, Magistrates, etc. who are good people.
Remember the Prepper's Motto: "Panic early and avoid the rush!"
Everything I post is Fiction and shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone.
88 = Heil Hitler
He ran a failed campaign for Congress several years ago, so I suppose the potential exists that he could be co-opted by the feds. I tend to believe that his actions since that time substantiate that he's clearly on the liberty movement side of the fence now though. He was at Bunkerville and has since established himself as a trusted confidant of the Bundys to the extent that he was a go-between for getting info out to the public through recorded phone calls inside of Malheur. I have questioned the Bundy's judgment concerning the informants they surrounded themselves with at both actions, and I've named the ones that I believed were government shills too, with my main source for the names being Mike Vanderboegh before he passed away last year, but I've never heard any rumblings, or even the first question posed, about Gavin being one of them. I have kept my ear close to the trials of both Malheur and Bunkerville, the latter of which all defendants were acquitted, and the former of which is nothing less than the fed's second bite at that apple as far as I'm concerned. Since Mike died, or maybe more so since Lavoy was murdered, Gavin has been the #1 source of reliable information about all of it that I've found. Never heard a soul before you suggest that he might be a plant and/or informant. Willing to listen if there is evidence of such, but otherwise, this is all I can attest to.
Blues
From the OKeepers main site:
https://www.oathkeepers.org/material...ville-retrial/
Material Witness Changes Testimony In Bunkerville Retrial
by Shari Dovale, July 25, 2017
The Bunkerville retrial of four defendants began the second week of testimony in Las Vegas today.
Scott Drexler, Eric Parker, Rick Lovelein and Steven Stewart are on trial for conspiracy and related crimes pertaining to the Bunkerville standoff of April 2014.
Sgt. Shannon Serena of the Nevada Highway Patrol testified today for the prosecution. He stated that he was originally given orders to help with the set up of the K-Rail system (guard rails set up by the Department of Transportation) as they were needed to help the BLM out of the area when the Bundy cattle were released later that day.
Serena then testified that he was in Moapa (about 33 miles from Bunkerville) when he said his orders were changed. He was very specific that his orders were change because “Officers were being held at gunpoint”. Serena testified that he was ordered to go assist these officers.
This is a major change in testimony from the first trial. I have reviewed the testimony from the first trial and cannot find any reference to officers being held at gunpoint.
Additionally, Serena showed dash-cam footage of his travels to Bunkerville, and after he arrived. He stated that there were several hundred people at the protest and that ¾ (three quarters) of them had firearms. He said they were “heavily armed”.
It was noted during cross examination that Serena never included in his report that he was told officers were being held at gunpoint.
Though he claimed to have been fearful at being so outnumbered, he could not remember even if there were any other officers from Nevada Highway Patrol, the Park Service, BLM or Swat. He could only remember about 10-12 metro police being there. He just couldn’t remember anything else.
Serena claimed to have had protesters pointing firearms directly at him. However, none of the dash-cam videos or the still photographs exhibit such behavior. Serena claimed that it was done off camera.
Although three of the four defense attorneys cross-examined Serena, the day came to a close before the fourth attorney, Todd Leventhal (who represents Scott Drexler) was able to cross-examine. Thus, tomorrow will begin with questions by Leventhal. Let’s hope Leventhal reviews transcripts from the last trial this evening. Afterward, the jurors will have their chance to question this witness.
The jury questions have become a highlight in this case. They are paying attention and making every attempt to know what is being kept from them. I am looking forward to them.
Remember the Prepper's Motto: "Panic early and avoid the rush!"
Everything I post is Fiction and shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone.
88 = Heil Hitler
They are continuing their railroading of these guys. The judge is handing down unconstitutional rulings on just about everything. The defense isn't being allowed to put up a good defense because she keeps ruling against them.
This is tyranny. When people are afraid of what their government will do to them if they exercise their God given rights, it is tyranny. This is where we are folks.
#1 differentiate between sheriffs and Police
#2 differentiate between legit LEOs and Globalist minions
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
“As a general rule, the earlier you recognize someone is trying to kill you, the better off you’ll be.”
"You think a wall as solid as the earth separates civilisation from barbarism. I tell you the division is a sheet of glass."
Update:
https://www.oathkeepers.org/prosecut...ville-retrial/
Prosecutors Seek Sanctions Against Steven Stewart’s Attorney – Bunkerville Retrial
by Nancy Oakley, July 26, 2017
The U.S. Justice Department is pulling no punches in the “Bunkerville Retrial” of Eric Parker, Steven Stewart, Scott Drexler and Rick Lovelein currently underway in a federal courtroom in Las Vegas, Nevada.
During morning arguments on Tuesday, July 25, 2017, Acting U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre demanded that Judge Gloria Navarro impose sanction and punishment on the defense team, especially Steven Stewart’s court-appointed attorney Richard Tanasi. Prosecutors argued that Tanasi crossed a line during questioning of a witness the day before.Trey Schillie, a tourist on vacation (who happened to be employed by the U.S. Forest Service in Colorado) was driving on I-15 northbound on April 12, 2014 when he found himself in the heart of the famed “Bundy standoff” that day. Schillie parked his car on the roadside and walked over to see what was happening. He took several now-famous photographs of the protesters in the wash below the bridge, and of the crowd on top of the northbound bridge. Among his photos was one of Defendant Eric Parker prone on the bridge with a rifle positioned in a crack between the bridge’s concrete barriers.
With the jury outside the courtroom, and the audience barely in their seats, Myrhe accused Tanasi of knowingly violating an ‘order in limine’ which prohibits the defense from mentioning forbidden topics. The day before, while questioning a witness named Trey Schillie, Tanasi had asked if Schillie feared being shot by Bureau of Land Management (BLM) agents. The topic of BLM conduct is strictly off limits according to an order imposed by the Judge just before the start of trial.
At the end of his direct testimony and cross-examination, the jurors asked a series of questions of Schillie, and Schillie responded that he felt fear while standing on the bridge taking pictures. This left an obvious question that badly needed to be resolved: did Schillie feel fear from the protesters surrounding him on the bridge or from the armed BLM agents aiming weapons in his direction down below? The photos show several people (not just Parker) in crouching positions behind the concrete, indicating a fear on the bridge that federal agents might open fire on them.
Attorney Tanasi was virtually compelled to ask the obvious question of Mr. Schillie. Tanasi sought to pin down the witness, first asking if Schillie saw anyone on the bridge pointing weapons at him. Then Tanasi asked Schillie to affirm that the BLM agents at a distance in the Wash below were pointing weapons in his direction. The prosecution objected immediately, and Schillie never answered.
Trial continued with another witness on the afternoon of the 24th. But Tanasi’s ‘source-of-fear’ question was the focus of the prosecution the following morning. Prosecutor Myrhe demanded that Tanasi be punished for asking a forbidden question. Judge Navarro asked Myrhe what punishment he would recommend, and Myrhe responded that the defense (not just Tanasi but all the defense lawyers) should be made to disclose to the prosecution their closing arguments. The prosecution also demanded an instruction to the jury that BLM conduct is not an issue in the trial.
Remember the Prepper's Motto: "Panic early and avoid the rush!"
Everything I post is Fiction and shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone.
88 = Heil Hitler