BREAKING: Judge Brown Signs Order Against Free Press
Gary Hunt Ordered To Appear In Portland Federal Court
by Shari Dovale
February 16, 2017
As we have seen all too often recently, US Federal Judge Anna Brown in the District of Oregon has had her own personal war on the US Constitution. She showed this stance on multiple occasions with the case of the US vs. Ammon Bundy, et al.
The second Malheur Protest Trial is proving to be no different from the first. She does not intend to allow jurors to consider the US Constitution as law, only what she dictates the law should be.
Additionally, she has decided that the defendants will not be allowed their right to a jury trial on all of the charges. She will decide on several of the verdicts herself through a bench trial.
But her fight with the people does not end there. She has decided to slap down the First Amendment, and Freedom of the Press. Specifically, she has begun with Gary Hunt.
Judge Brown signed an order today to claim jurisdiction over Hunt, though he resides in the District of California. She has directed him to appear in her court in Portland, Oregon on March 10, 2017 and to file a written response to her by March 3rd.
She has decided that Mr. Hunt should not be allowed to bring the truth to the public, specifically the truth about the Malheur Protest Trials and the the informants involved.
Brown had previously thought that the identities of the confidential informants was not to be public, or even go to the defense. The defense was finally allowed redacted information that was meant to confuse them and hinder their chances at a fair trial. She ordered that these documents were not to be published.
These documents have not been published.
However, nothing is good enough in this case unless the government can justify it’s $1million+ price tag by getting any kind of tally mark in their win column.
You can read all about the case here.
At the time of this writing, Hunt had not been served with these papers. When he is finally served, probably tomorrow morning, he will make a decision on how he will respond. Until then, we must inform the public of the continuing saga of Judge Brown v. US Constitution.
Freedom of the Press is guaranteed by our Constitution. We cannot let the overreaching government take away our right to the truth.
U.S. Constitution
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Trump should immediately pardon any convictions in the case and support locals in initiating a recall of this judge.
These liberal tyrants that we have allowed to infest our court system have to be purged if we are to EVER see justice again.
Did you know that the American Revolution almost kicked-off early, in the 1750’s ? It’s true. The root cause was when the locally elected judges were >replaced< by Crown Appointed and paid judges. The early Americans knew immediately that they would never gain a positive ruling against a Crown Ruling when the judges are paid buy and serve at the pleasure of The Crown.
Today, it's these appointed 'judges' who use their postings for political rather than judicial reasons and are currying favor with their masters in DC (and beyond?). These communists do indeed 'hang us with our own rope'.. because we PAY the federal prosecutors and their paid informers and paid judges to harass us using our own tax money. I is rarely lawful behavior, but they've made it 'legal'.
Who’s payroll is she on ? Hummmm
Great read but there is one mistake. It’s $100,000,000 that they need to justify. Not $1million.
Although I am on the side of freedom and our constitution, the first ammendment as shown applys to congress. Judge Brown isn’t in the congress. Judges are running ammouk, what can we do to get these enemies of America off the bench?
Parts of the constitution enumerate congressional powers but aside from that the constitution applies to everyone equally.
Mike : we textual originalists would question wether the constitution applies to everyone. The constitution is after all the founding charter of the Federal Govt, and delineates the enumerated and discreet powers and jobs it has. Concerns about this central Govt they were creating getting out of control were of great concern to our founders, and getting the sovereign and independent states to ratify it necessitated a promise to add more “Chains” to the structure of checks and balances. Of course, these chains are the first 10 amendments. My point here is that The const. and BOR are strictures on the Federal Govt, and not the states.Read the preamble to the BOR and you’ll see.The states all have their own declarations of rights.A piecemeal judicial process called “Incorporation” has SCOTUS dictating to the states in civil rights issues, but it’s doubtful if the states are under any obligation to comply. As to Judge Brown, she IS a Federal official, and were it not for the misconstruction and abuse that has become standard operating procedure in the Federal Culture, she would be bound by the const. and Bill of Rights.
Judges are only supposed to work within the laws passed by congress and signed by the president that are constitutional. There’s the rub. They really stretch their discretion here for nefarious reasons (what righteous reason could you have?). Congress can over ride a Supreme Court Decision, but the leadership doesn’t have the b***…. er, the problem there is they like being supermen in congress and they want to get elected more than anything else. If we limited them to two terms, maybe they would risk doing the right thing more often. The problem with most judgeships, due to the fact that they have lifetime tenure, is that they rely too heavily on human character. Integrity is such a rare commodity these days that anyone that has it is public enemy number one because he is a threat to the many that don’t in high places. …edited… Do you realize that the SC decided that it will be impossible to convict Federal officials (politicians) of bribery? Know why? Because they are constantly taken of fact finding junkets were they are put up in lavish digs and hauled around in limos and wined and dined by litigants with cases before the court? Yep, that our SC. We should make it a rule that no one who ever took Law School, Sociology, Political Science or even Pre-law shall ever be a judge.
SPOT ON
Sorta somethin’ like
INHERENT:
Honest, Intelligent, Emotionally & Psychologically Stable, complimented by well seasoned integrity; an genuinely tenured altruistic nature . . . ensuring dedicated, motivated application of these aforementioned character-set(s) sub-set(s) and skills within our EXHAUSTINGLY Vast / seemingly INFINITELY Angular legal system; ensuring timely resolution(s) of dispute(s) via equitable NON-DISCRIMINATORY relief.
Well, shux; just where the hell will we find THAT?
The Judicial Branch is STRICTLY LIMITED to Laws that have been LEGISLATED by BOTH Houses and Signed into Law by the President.
There is no power or authority to ignore, rewrite, or ‘misinterpret the LAWS to suit ones one preferences.