Monday, September 26, 2016

Burns Chronicles No 30 Officer? What Officer?

 bank-robber

In the Indictments, both in Oregon and Nevada, there is one Count that raises some serious questions.  The exact wording, to the extent of understanding the charges being made, is as follows:

For Oregon:
COUNT 1
(Conspiracy to Impede Officers of the United States)
(18 u.s.c. § 372)

On or about November 5, 2015, and continuing through February 12, 2016, in the District of Oregon, defendants…
It then goes on to list the Defendants and makes some rather general accusations, WITHOUT naming “Officers” or, how they were impeded.

Next, we look to the Nevada Indictment:

COUNT TWO
Conspiracy to Impede or Injure a Federal Officer
(Title 18, United States Code, Section 372)

Then, they go into a narrative, missing, of course, any named “Officers”, or any specific acts that constitute impeding.

The statute cited reads:

4 comments:

  1. The SCOUS ruled that this is a legitimate charge 35 years ago when the USJD started the "war on drugs". They do not need to name the officers, the department or any criminal code. The mere act of saying "NO" to a FLEA is in and of itself a federal felony. The authority of a federal agent in the field is almost G_D like in power and scope. The only things that a "citizen" can still do in the presence of a federal agent is to give total submission to all orders and refuse ALL questions. You don't get a lawyer or anything else till the federal secret police say so. Under US Code, EVERYTHING the feds have done in this matter is perfectly legal. The people involved in the Burns and Bundy standoff were bone stupid. They WILL go to federal prison. Probably for what will be effectively life. They WILL face "asset forfeiture" and this WILL be done to all involved. The people involved in this believed that they could kick the Beast in the nuts and get away with out bloodshed. They were and are fools who will pay dearly for the folly.---Ray

    ReplyDelete
  2. The thing that the "Bundy protestors" didn't understand, then or now, is that: Under current US law. They have NO RIGHTS AT ALL other than the ones the FLEA's and USJD allow. The moment that they got the idiotic notion into their heads that they could "say no" without actually fighting they were doomed. You have two AND ONLY TWO choices in America today. Total submission or civil war. The elections are rigged. The courts are rigged. You HAVE NO RIGHT TO PEACEFUL REDRESS OF GREAVANCE. You have no right to protest. In fact you have no "rights" not granted as privilege by the federal dictatorship. The Bundy's and many other's on the "right" seem to think that this is still the America of childhood memory, when nothing could be further from the truth. If we want a country where the "Bundy's" were "right" and the federals admit doing them wrong , our children and grand children will need to swim a river of blood to get it. No other option remains.----Ray

    ReplyDelete