Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress

You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 7400 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason by anyone. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products. When you post a comment, it is in the public domain. You have no copyright that can be enforced against any other individual who comments here! Do not attempt to copyright your comments. If that is not to your liking please do not comment. Any attempt to copyright a comment will be deleted. Copyright is a legal term that means the creator of original content. This does not include ideas. You are not an author of articles on this blog. Your comments are deemed donated to the public domain. They will be considered "fair use" on this blog. People donate to this blog because of what Anna writes and what Paul writes, not what the people commenting write. We are not using your comments. You are putting them in the public domain when you comment. What you write in the comments is your opinion only. This comment section is not a court of law. Do not attempt to publish any kind of "affidavit" in the comments. Any such attempt will also be summarily deleted. Comments containing foul language will be deleted no matter what is said in the comment.

Thursday, September 7, 2017

Idaho state legislators sign letter asking Sessions to back off Bundy prosecutions

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Evidence is mounting that an Obama-nominated federal judge is determined to continue trying Bundy Ranch defendants until they are found guilty.
U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro has decided to force two Bundy Ranch defendants to undergo yet a third trial scheduled to begin on Oct. 10, in what is amounting to a “revenge prosecution” tracing back to former Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid.
In a trial that ended Aug. 22, Steven Stewart of Idaho and Ricky Lovelien of Montana were found not guilty while Idaho residents O. Scott Drexler and Eric J. Parker were acquitted on most charges.  But a hung jury deadlocked on assault and weapons charges for these two defendants, voting 11-to-1 on two charges for Drexler and four charges for Parker related to the 2014 Bundy Ranch standoff.
Judge Navarro, the Harry Reid hand-picked candidate that President Obama nominated to the federal bench in 2009, has decided Drexler and Parker will be included among the seven Bunkerville standoff defendants, including rancher Cliven Bundy,  scheduled to stand trial on Oct. 10. This trial is expected to last about two months.
On Aug. 29, 2017, Idaho state representative Dorothy Moon, a Republican, wrote to Attorney General Sessions a letter signed by one-third of all Idaho state legislators, including 26 House members, 8 Senate members, and 5 retired lawmakers, requesting that defendants Drexler and Parker not be forced to undergo yet a third attempt to find them guilty being pursued by the U.S. Justice Department in a case being begun under the Obama administration.
A copy of the letter was also addressed to President Trump.
The letter read in part as follows:
  • We believe that the decision by the current U.S. Attorney of Nevada to prosecute these men a third time represents disrespect for the rule of law and the Jury system. A third trial would show blatant disregard for tax funds collected from hard working law-abiding citizens who are represented by these juries whom have found them innocent of 34 of the 40 charges and hung by the very slimmest margins in those where the jury stood deadlocked. The decisions of 10-2 to acquit in the first trial and 11-1 to acquit in the second trial highlights the narrow margin by which the prosecution hopes to continue their attack.
The letter concluded by asking Sessions to instruct federal prosecutors to set Parker and Drexler free, as well as allowing two other defendants to use time already served as total sentencing in the case.
Cliven Bundy has been incarcerated without trial since January 2016.
At the trial that ended Aug. 22, U.S. District Judge Gloria M. Navarro had refused to allow attorneys for the defendants to present arguments regarding First Amendment free speech rights or Second Amendment rights to bear arms, ruling both lines of argumentation were not relevant to the criminal charges the four defendants faced.
Even more outrageous, Gerald “Jerry DeLemus of Rochester, New Hampshire, was sentenced to five years imprisonment after U.S. District Judge Gloria M. Navarro refused to allow him to change his guilty plea to “not guilty.”
In denying DeLemus the right to change his plea, Judge Navarro ruled DeLemus had failed to display sufficient remorse for his actions, rejecting the argument his Sixth Amendment rights had been violated because DeLemus lacked adequate legal counsel capable of apprising him of the legal charges and assisting him in pleading with full knowledge of the facts and the law.
Sources close to the DeLemus family told that DeLemus wanted to change his plea and face trial because he came to the conclusion he would be acquitted on charges virtually identical to the charges all Lovelien, Steward, Parker, and Drexler successfully defended to be found “not guilty” in the jury verdict handed down Aug. 22.
As Roger Stone has pointed out, an underlying factor in the Bundy Ranch case is that former Democratic Party Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wanted the Bundy Ranch land to install Chinese solar panels in a deal where the Chinese company seeking to build the solar panel plant had employed lawyer Rory Reid, the son of Sen. Reid, to be the primary representative for the U.S. corporation fronting the deal.
Now serving out the remaining six years of his prison term, DeLemus was permanently moved in August to the federal prison at Fort Devens in Ayers, Massachusetts, some 90-minutes away from his home and his wife.


  1. Does anyone out there have the intelligence of Nicola tesla that can produce a working model of some kind of disentigrator that the rest of us can have and use if we need to....because ive come to the conclusion that the only way they will listen is to have a weapon so superior to anything theve ever seen before that they will finally yeild and give us what we want just to have access to that kind of technology...!! Thats the only thing the "deep state" appriatiates...weapons of war...!!! We need something they will salivate over and will do anything to get there hands on it....isnt that sad!! A bully only respects one thing...a superior opponent...its always been that way and it always will..!! Until the lord comes back and shows them real power....!!!!

  2. Imagine the message to the District of Criminals if many state legislations would follow suit?

  3. BLM land is under a couple "Acts of Congress"[1] and as such it can be argued that every "Act" is limited to land that is fully owned by Congress (as the "United States"). Unless the state has ceded the land thereby granting the United States exclusive legislative proprietary-based jurisdiction over the land then the jurisdiction can and should be challenged.

    All "BLM" land should be scrutinized as to whether the state actually ceded the land to the "United States".

    [1] The Taylor Grazing Act and the Act that created the Department of the Interior.

  4. people please referred to the ...

    All courts in this State and every other State of the Union, operate under the "Clearfield Doctrine" from the case of Clearfield Trust Co. v. US, 318 US 363, (1943).
    This case explains the Clearfield Doctrine as this:
    "Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and takes on the character of a mere private citizen [where private corporate commercial paper {Federal Reserve Notes} are concerned]..." "For purposes of suit, such corporations and individuals are regarded as an entity entirely separate from government." Bank of US v. Planters Bank, 9 Wheaton (22US) 904, 6L.Ed. 24. {Added}
    The definition of "money" becomes extremely relevant once the above is known and understood. So, the question is now "What is the substance of the money used by the government entity coming against you"? "MONEY" as defined in the Constitution for the several States united at Article I, section 10, clause 1 or "MONEY" as defined in the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) adopted by your state legislature? In Michigan, see Michigan Compiled Laws section 440.1101, et seq., under definitions. The UCC itself states that its definitions are controlling over dictionary definitions.
    When any State agency come against you, normally no Constitutional arguments can be allowed since it is presumed that you are dealing, knowingly, voluntarily and willfully, in the commercial law of contracts, implied or written. In that "State" (State of the Forum), you loose all protections of both State and Federal Constitutions. If this is your first encounter with the term "State" be advised that it does not mean the geographical area that you live in. The term "state" has at least seven (7) meanings in most dictionaries. Please look it up in a Black's Law Dictionary and you will find there is even a great difference between the defined meanings of the words State" and "state".
    The political, colorable, corporate "State" does not appear as a word in the Holy Bible. However, the word State does come from the Greek root word "stato" which means "to stand". A State is something that stands stationary, fixed or established. "Establishments" exist only in the common thoughts created and sustained in the minds of men. It is a "legal fiction" or a
    "fiction of law". A State is a corporate fiction existing purely in thought. Corporations, and similar creations, are all fictions made up in men's minds. Mere imagination! Fictional, meaning neither natural nor existing of themselves. LIES. They exist by the mutual agreement of the thoughts of men. Likewise a State exists only in the minds of men. It is not the real state, that being the physical ground and the real people located thereupon. The State cannot be seen, talked to, harmed, injured, damaged, touched, made love to, moved to tears or write you a letter. It has all of the emotions of today's computer. It is a political creation designed to protect and/or control a certain object. It is not a Biblical concept. These foreigners do not respect our country rules, which is the constitution. And they know our laws and policies better then the American people. As long as you are calling these people government they will lying to you and taking everything you own, even your body. They know we dont have no one coming to save us but yourselves. So their policy is, Get Down or Lay Down! So what you gonna do? That's the question.

    1. The CORPORATE UNITED STATES, has always been based on only two doctrines..."The Clearfield Doctrine" and "Erie Railroad v Thompkins".

    2. The CORPORATE UNITED STATES, has always been based on only two doctrines..."The Clearfield Doctrine" and "Erie Railroad v Thompkins".

    3. I've printed that document out earlier this year.( The Clear field Doctrine) and have places it in my docket for this forclosure case

  5. Lincoln created a fictional corperation copy of the original the United states of America and run it as though it were three original .
    You walk into court that judge must drag you into his corporate world and you must be smart enough to avoid his not letting him tie you to the all capital letters name.or say yes, say you understand .you must counter sue do not go in as a defendant .

  6. I am not at all happy with AG Sessions. He has turned out to be a wimp and can any of us name any thing he has done so far? I can't. He appears to let everyone walk all over him. I am for kicking his butt to the curb and getting somebody with real ''internals'' such as Rudy Juliani. Sessions is acting just like Establishment. Trump should send him back to Alabama where he can go just as slow as he wants to for the rest of his life.

  7. You would think that someone who has created a 5 billion dollar company like Trump, and dealt with building codes and plenty of bueracracy along the way, as well as hiring good employees, that he would have developed a 6th sense about people...!! But so far everyone he has picked to be in his inner circle so he can get things done, have all either betrayed him, backstabbed him, lied to him, and in many cases either are plotting to have him removed or outright killed...!!! How in the hell did he build a $5 billion dollar empire..?? I guess he has never dealt with the worst of the worst...!! They have become such good con artist that even Trump cant see through them...!!

  8. There's something in our judicial system called "double jeopardy". You cannot be tried for the same crime twice, let alone three times, Judge Navarro.

  9. We are all sovereign sentient beings, children of the Creator. Corporations have no authority over us, unless we consent. There is no law, except the universal law of the infinite Creator. There are only contracts, most of which are fraudulent. All presentments are an offer to contract. Promptly reject the offered contract, even if you are kidnapped and dragged into their Admiralty court room. If we enter a plea, we have granted them jurisdiction. If we are represented by an attorney, we are a ward of the court and they have jurisdiction. Their game is to confuse and intimidate us. Refuse to grant the "court" jurisdiction. Also, never underestimate the power of a counter claim filed in the land jurisdiction (common law).


Place your comment. The moderator will review it after it is published. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason.