Help support alternative media by visiting our Allies

Selkirk Mountain Real Estate

Judge Denies Transparency in Nevada

We The People Must Stand Up and Be Heard!


Judge Denies Transparency in Nevada

By Shari Dovale and Bret Roush


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, means that the prosecution is representing the PEOPLE of the UNITED STATES, at least, this is what they are supposed to be doing.

The truth is that representing you does not mean they have to tell you anything about what they are doing. They can keep all of their government dealings secret from you, because they feel that you cannot be trusted with the information. They, again, show that transparency is too dangerous to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Here is another example of the government abusing their power: The case of the political prisoners in Nevada are to be kept secret from ‘We The People’ as has been ordered by Judge Peggy Leen.

Here we go again, with Big Brother telling you that you cannot be trusted with the truth. The government does not want you to see the documents, or the evidence, that they plan to use in the witch-hunt against the political prisoners they have incarcerated.

Secrecy over transparency is the new normal.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen, has told the defense teams for all 19 defendants that they are denied the right to share the information with the public. This 4-page order was issued without a public hearing, therefore the People of the United States, again, have no say.

What do they not want us to see? It has been made very clear over the course of the past six months that the government is afraid of the public. They do not like crowd-sourcing. They are afraid of too many eyes scrutinizing their shoddy behavior and work.

The Federal Government is afraid to Stand Up in the Court of Public Opinion.

The political prisoners, who are in federal custody, are charged with conspiring to assault BLM agents on April 12, 2014, and take back impounded Bundy cattle that had been grazing on public land.

This means that if the government conspires to conduct illegal activities against you, you have no recourse to stop them. If you attempt to do so, then you will be charged with multiple felonies and put on trial in a dog and pony show.

It is just another example of the Socialist changes that have taken place throughout our country. If we allow the out-of-control government to continue to run amok, then we can kiss out Constitution goodbye. We The People Must Stand Up and Be Heard!

The Americans Are Coming!

7 Comments on Judge Denies Transparency in Nevada

  1. Have you seen what’s happening in Canada? “Judicial Madness”. Soviet-style. If a plaintiff or a defendant, usually self-represented, conducts a perfectly legal trial in their interests, to the full extent of the law, a judge can be petitioned to DECLARE THEM CRAZY (mentally ill) without psychiatric evidence! Why? because they’ve had “enough” access to justice for now, thank you, time to stop! A refusal to “stop” pursuing your rights gets you slapped with a CRAZY label and LISTED by the Justice Department, so your name can be found online by anyone hoping to defame you.

    Selected quotations from the Rhodes Scholar (Yves-Marie Morissette) behind the new “system” (which is also in process of being spread to all of Canada via the FEDERAL court system):

    Morissette also wants chemical lobotomies introduced to turn self-representers into the walking dead if they refuse to OBEY their superior authorities. Morissette also recommends HALOPERIDOL, the same chemical used by the Soviets to torture and silence political dissidents.

    A couple of guest articles by one young man who was declared “crazy” by the judge, without psychiatric evidence:

  2. B’s being tried in the court of public opinion in no way gives anybody a fair trial. Everything will be released in the trial like it should. Wher it will be tried by constitutional due process

  3. Thomas Jefferson: “…To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps… The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots….”

    Understand that all who serve within our governments get the authority they use from the US Constitution, state Constitution’s. The US Constitution not only defines our government in writing, it also is the supreme contract that all are under (state and federal) and Oath bound to – the highest lawful binding we have in America.

    Read it and you will notice that no where was any branch of our government delegated any type of authority to hide things from us – it is a usurped power – hence unlawful here in the USA (okay for dictators, kings, etc, but forbidden here).

    No judge was ever delegated the authority to decide what the people may have access to.

    Patrick Henry, American colonial revolutionary: “The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.”

    Thomas Paine: “A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.”

    Patrick Henry: “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government — lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”

    Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, “The Complete Jefferson”, p. 322: “On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

    Thomas Jefferson: “When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself public property.”

    As Michael LeMieux put it: “The Constitution has very little to do with the American citizen. It was written to establish a Federal Government and to place the boundaries by which that government would operate. The constitution was never designed to provide or enumerate the rights of the citizens but to restrain the federal government from meddling in state and ultimately citizen affairs.”

    Not sure if you have ever read any that Dr. Vieira wrote, but this from hims sums it up well;

    “Dr. Edwin Vieira:
    “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides…

    The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights…
    The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.

    … the famous case Norton v. Shelby County… The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”

    And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution…”

    What are the defining characteristics of a limited government? They are its disabilities; what it does not have legal authority to do. Look at the First Amendment… What does it do? It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion. But how does it do that? I quote: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press” etcetera. “Congress shall make no law;” that’s a statement of an absence of power. That’s a statement of a disability.

    How should that have been done? Well, Americans would have had to understand and enforce their Constitution. You notice I say Americans, not the Congress or the Supreme Court, because who is the final arbiter of this document? [holding a copy of the Constitution] It is not Congress, and it is not the Supreme Court. It is “we the people.” Read the thing. How does it start? “We the people do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States”; not “we the politicians,” not “we the judges.” Those people are the agents of the people. We the people are the principals.
    The doctrine is very clear that, being the principals, we are the Constitution’s ultimate interpreters and enforcers. You don’t have to take my word for it. Let’s go back to the Founding Fathers…
    The Founding Fathers were profound students of law and political philosophy, their knowledge unequaled by any today. Their mentor in that era was William Blackstone, who wrote Blackstone’s Commentaries, probably the most widely read legal treatise of its time, certainly here in the United States. What did Blackstone write about this subject? He wrote, “Whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself; there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to.”

    ‘We the people are the Constitution’s ultimate interpreters’. (Dr. Edwin Vieira, )”
    [Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).
    For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. He is also one of our country’s most eminent constitutional attorneys, having brought four cases that were accepted by the supreme Court and having won three of them.] (End Dr. Vieira quotes)

    “A constitution is designated as a supreme enactment, a fundamental act of legislation by the people of the state. A constitution is legislation direct from the people acting in their sovereign capacity, while a statute is legislation from their representatives, subject to limitations prescribed by the superior authority.” Ellingham v. Dye, 231 U. S. 250.

    “The basic purpose of a written constitution has a two-fold aspect, first securing [not granting] to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined spheres.” Du Pont v. Du Pont, 85 A 724.

    “The constitution of a state is stable and permanent, not to be worked upon the temper of the times, not to rise and fall with the tide of events. Notwithstanding the competition of opposing interests, and the violence of contending parties, it remains firm and immoveable, as a mountain amidst the strife and storms, or a rock in the ocean amidst the raging of the waves.” Vanhorne v. Dorrance, supra.

    Cooley, The General Principles of Constitutional Law, 3rd. ed. (1898), pp. 386-387. (Little & Brown Co.).: “In the construction of these instruments the following rules are actually observed:
    1. The practical construction must be uniform. A constitution does not mean one thing at one time and another at some subsequent time.
    2. The object of construction is to give effect to the intent of the people in establishing the Constitution; it is the intent of the law giver that is to be enforced. But the intent is to be found in the instrument itself. . .”

    Rubinstein v. Collins, 20 F.3d 160, 1990 “Knowing failure to disclose material information necessary to prevent statement from being misleading, or making representation despite knowledge that it has no reasonable basis in fact, are actionable as fraud under law.”
    It is well established law that Fraud vitiates (makes void) any contract that arises from it.

    Brookfield Construction Company V. Stewart 284 F Sup. 94: “An officer who acts in violation of the constitution ceases to represent the government.”

    Though this is off topic at first glance, it will greatly assist you in understanding our US Constitution as it is from Hillsdale College online free Constitution classes;

    Anything written or discussed by Dr. Vieira, LeMioux, etc helps one to understand the differences between what one is told about the US Constitution, and what is actual concerning it.

    Our government is a Constitutional Republic, and it is in writing. It matters not what the traitors and domestic enemies of our nation say about us being a ‘democracy”, etc. Trying to unlawfully control our speech through polita-speech. Trying to make it seem as if judges are the “last word” on what the US Constitution says. Etc.

    Want to keep a free nation? Read it, put a few hours into those Hillssdale classes, particularly the Public Policy from a Constitutional Viewpoint section. The videos are not that long, but well worth listening to. Read and listen to Dr. Vieira; so much is available that is real – and you can tell it is by READING the US Constitution for yourself.

  4. I believe all the government officials have a Hitler complex!!!! This is sickening and un-american!!!!!! They are a disgrace to this country and the justice system!!!!!!!!

  5. It’s troubling that one judge has that much power! I’m a realist and see things pretty black and white! Unfortunately Bunkerville 2014 pissed off the federal govt bad! The Bundys et al will be serving long sentences in federal prison. Even with a plea bargain in Oregon, one participant will serve 12 yrs and hasn’t even received his sentence for Bunkerville. Ammon testified under oath already admitting to the conspiracy charge last time he was in court. Have no idea why his attorney thought it was smart to even put him on the stand. Everyone is going to be made an example of. I sincerely feel for their wives and children. Sad deal all way around.

  6. Too Right…..And you hit the nail on the head in describing the Govt Mafia as being afraid of us. They should be afraid, they are guilty as hell and they know it. This same fear is their motivation for trying to disarm us. Haven’t we seen this kind of thing before ? – Say on the morning of April 19 1775 ?…….

Comments are closed.