Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 8858
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#76

Post by RVInit »

NMgirl wrote:JFC x10. You head of the DOJ, you stupid effwad. Not taking a side? I'm sure your prosecutors appreciate your utter lack of support.
Jenny Wilson @jennydwilson
Sessions commends prosecutor's leadership on Bundy case but says "I'm not taking sides or commenting on the case"
I know, right? It's one of the most asinine comments I've heard ever come from an AG. Not taking sides. So, maybe it's OK for citizens to point guns at law enforcement, I guess especially if those law enforcement are "just" the ones who protect public land. :evil:
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 46295
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#77

Post by Sterngard Friegen »

NMgirl wrote:JFC x10. You head of the DOJ, you stupid effwad. Not taking a side? I'm sure your prosecutors appreciate your utter lack of support.
Jenny Wilson @jennydwilson
Sessions commends prosecutor's leadership on Bundy case but says "I'm not taking sides or commenting on the case"
:like:

User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 7909
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:26 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#78

Post by pipistrelle »

RVInit wrote:
NMgirl wrote:JFC x10. You head of the DOJ, you stupid effwad. Not taking a side? I'm sure your prosecutors appreciate your utter lack of support.
Jenny Wilson @jennydwilson
Sessions commends prosecutor's leadership on Bundy case but says "I'm not taking sides or commenting on the case"
I know, right? It's one of the most asinine comments I've heard ever come from an AG. Not taking sides. So, maybe it's OK for citizens to point guns at law enforcement, I guess especially if those law enforcement are "just" the ones who protect public land. :evil:
The main focus of his speech was immigrant criminals. Extrapolate from there.
Edit: No mention of the police killed by the Millers?

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 8858
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#79

Post by RVInit »

RVInit wrote:
NMgirl wrote:JFC x10. You head of the DOJ, you stupid effwad. Not taking a side? I'm sure your prosecutors appreciate your utter lack of support.
Jenny Wilson @jennydwilson
Sessions commends prosecutor's leadership on Bundy case but says "I'm not taking sides or commenting on the case"
I know, right? It's one of the most asinine comments I've heard ever come from an AG. Not taking sides. So, maybe it's OK for citizens to point guns at law enforcement, I guess especially if those law enforcement are "just" the ones who protect public land. :evil:
Edit: Especially in light of the fact that Cliven Bundy took his case to court first, and lost. So, if we don't like the outcome of a court case, we can take matters into our own hands and Jeff Sessions won't have an opinion about it? :roll: That's more than slightly disturbing.
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

Hercule Parrot
Posts: 695
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:58 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#80

Post by Hercule Parrot »

Jenny Wilson @jennydwilson
Sessions commends prosecutor's leadership on Bundy case but says "I'm not taking sides or commenting on the case"
Cowardly weasel.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 28078
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#81

Post by bob »

Jenny Wilson @jennydwilson wrote:Sessions commends prosecutor's leadership on Bundy case but says "I'm not taking sides or commenting on the case"
The Acting U.S. Attorney for D. Nev. was previously the lead prosecutor against the Bundys. NBD. :roll:
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4538
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#82

Post by NMgirl »

Updates from Andrea Olson-Parker, 7/12/17:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEC-7Z1h9D4

I'm at a conference in The Heartland of these United States. Holy buckets of sweat, Batman. 94 and the humidity is like a wet veil. My glasses fogged up when I walked out of the hotel this morning. Anyhoo, hoping to have a chance to summarize Andrea's vids tonight. Meanwhile, you have the links, should you have some time to waste.

User avatar
jmj
Posts: 732
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 11:01 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#83

Post by jmj »

NMgirl wrote:Updates from Andrea Olson-Parker, 7/12/17:



I'm at a conference in The Heartland of these United States. Holy buckets of sweat, Batman. 94 and the humidity is like a wet veil. My glasses fogged up when I walked out of the hotel this morning. Anyhoo, hoping to have a chance to summarize Andrea's vids tonight. Meanwhile, you have the links, should you have some time to waste.
You can safely skip this one. The first half consists of a few protest chants screeched directly into the microphone (protect your ears). The second half is mostly Andrea wandering around with her rag-tag band of poots waiting for Sessions to leave the building while telling us (about 5 separate times) that Sessions is not a friend to poots because he "commended the prosecution".

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4538
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#84

Post by NMgirl »

"Possible tyranny in jury selection."

Parker-Olson is bent out of shape on whatever went on with jury selection today. Apparently the prosecution says there is gender and race bias on the jury panel? Something like that? We will have to wait until someone with some credibility reports on the jury brouhaha. The vid is short, less than five minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czpNgtNaWg8

User avatar
maydijo
Posts: 2764
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm
Location: where women glow and men plunder
Occupation: harassing marsupials

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#85

Post by maydijo »

NMgirl wrote:"Possible tyranny in jury selection."

Parker-Olson is bent out of shape on whatever went on with jury selection today. Apparently the prosecution says there is gender and race bias on the jury panel? Something like that? We will have to wait until someone with some credibility reports on the jury brouhaha. The vid is short, less than five minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czpNgtNaWg8
It's evident that Andrea Parker-Olson graduated from a very good law school and has a solid legal basis for her arguments.

:sarcasm:

User avatar
poplove
Posts: 423
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 5:43 pm
Location: Las Vegas NV
Occupation: Air Force Veteran & Retired DoD civilian.
Contact:

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#86

Post by poplove »

NMgirl wrote:"Possible tyranny in jury selection."

Parker-Olson is bent out of shape on whatever went on with jury selection today. Apparently the prosecution says there is gender and race bias on the jury panel? Something like that? We will have to wait until someone with some credibility reports on the jury brouhaha. The vid is short, less than five minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czpNgtNaWg8
She's upset about everything today. The AG patted the prosecution on the back and the jury is being picked by the judge only. Good thing Andrea has a nice cool pool to relax in every day thanks to Deb Jordan's sister house. Seems to me that her anger should be directed at the one person who brought her to the position she's currently in.
Image

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 6062
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#87

Post by Maybenaut »

NMgirl wrote:"Possible tyranny in jury selection."

Parker-Olson is bent out of shape on whatever went on with jury selection today. Apparently the prosecution says there is gender and race bias on the jury panel? Something like that? We will have to wait until someone with some credibility reports on the jury brouhaha. The vid is short, less than five minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czpNgtNaWg8
What she's talking about are called Batson challenges. Although as a general rule each side is allowed so many peremptory challenges, they cannot exercise a peremptory challenge if they can't state a race-neutral or gender-neutral reason for the challenge. And it appears that the defense is saying, I just have a gut feeling that there's some deception and that's the gender and race neutral reason, and it sounds like the judge is saying that that's not enough. I don't know about that, but that does appear to be what's happening. So she's out to lunch with her, "since when do you have to explain your challenges."
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
maydijo
Posts: 2764
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm
Location: where women glow and men plunder
Occupation: harassing marsupials

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#88

Post by maydijo »

I don't know how to post videos from Facebook, but Andrea is back with another, this one longer, still ranty because we live in the Soviet Union and there's no such thing as justice. Sure wish these people would work out if the ebil gubmint are Nazis or Commies, although they are dumb enough to think they're the same thing anyway.

User avatar
sad-cafe
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#89

Post by sad-cafe »

NMgirl wrote:"Possible tyranny in jury selection."

Parker-Olson is bent out of shape on whatever went on with jury selection today. Apparently the prosecution says there is gender and race bias on the jury panel? Something like that? We will have to wait until someone with some credibility reports on the jury brouhaha. The vid is short, less than five minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czpNgtNaWg8
do the poots consume meth? That sure looks like meth mouth to me.

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4538
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#90

Post by NMgirl »

Maybenaut wrote: What she's talking about are called Batson challenges. Although as a general rule each side is allowed so many peremptory challenges, they cannot exercise a peremptory challenge if they can't state a race-neutral or gender-neutral reason for the challenge. And it appears that the defense is saying, I just have a gut feeling that there's some deception and that's the gender and race neutral reason, and it sounds like the judge is saying that that's not enough. I don't know about that, but that does appear to be what's happening. So she's out to lunch with her, "since when do you have to explain your challenges."
Thank you, Maybenaut! Olson-Parker's vid now makes more sense to me, kinda, sorta, in a limited way on an off night.

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 6062
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#91

Post by Maybenaut »

maydijo wrote:I don't know how to post videos from Facebook, but Andrea is back with another, this one longer, still ranty because we live in the Soviet Union and there's no such thing as justice. Sure wish these people would work out if the ebil gubmint are Nazis or Commies, although they are dumb enough to think they're the same thing anyway.
Yeah I looked at that video too, she goes on about Batson versus Kentucky (although she calls it Lawson versus Kentucky) and says how Batson was supposed to be so that the government didn't strike minority jurors. She was all upset that it was being used against the defense. And that is what the original Batson case was about. But Batson has been expanded so that just like the prosecution cannot racially pack a jury, neither can the defense. And the reason Batson is sauce for the prosecution's gander is that (a) the government is every bit as entitled to a fair trial as the defense; and (b) it is a way for the court to protect the individual jurors from being discriminated against.
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 6062
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#92

Post by Maybenaut »

NMgirl wrote:
Maybenaut wrote: What she's talking about are called Batson challenges. Although as a general rule each side is allowed so many peremptory challenges, they cannot exercise a peremptory challenge if they can't state a race-neutral or gender-neutral reason for the challenge. And it appears that the defense is saying, I just have a gut feeling that there's some deception and that's the gender and race neutral reason, and it sounds like the judge is saying that that's not enough. I don't know about that, but that does appear to be what's happening. So she's out to lunch with her, "since when do you have to explain your challenges."
Thank you, Maybenaut! Olson-Parker's vid now makes more sense to me, kinda, sorta, in a limited way on an off night.
Say! Don't I know you from the cinematographer's party?
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 3756
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#93

Post by Dan1100 »

I take it that Black and Brown people would be bad for the defense because they know what is supposed to happen when you point guns at the cops.

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 6062
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#94

Post by Maybenaut »

Dan1100 wrote:I take it that Black and Brown people would be bad for the defense because they know what is supposed to happen when you point guns cellphones, paperback books, and Skittles at the cops cops and cop wannabes.
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13616
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#95

Post by Notorial Dissent »

I think there is a much simpler reason that that, but maybe I'm just assuming.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 46295
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#96

Post by Sterngard Friegen »

So poots don't want to be judged by women or people who aren't white crackers?

Precious.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 28078
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#97

Post by bob »

Jury of their peers, and all that.

* * *

"For the record," If the court denies the prosecutor's motion, that's the end of it. If the court grants the prosecutor's motion, it'll dismiss the venire, and jury selection starts anew.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13616
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#98

Post by Notorial Dissent »

Sterngard Friegen wrote:So poots don't want to be judged by women or people who aren't white crackers?

Precious.
Got that did you?? Precious snowflakes the lot of them.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

boots
Posts: 3289
Joined: Sat May 16, 2015 5:23 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#99

Post by boots »

bob wrote:Jury of their peers, and all that.

* * *

"For the record," If the court denies the prosecutor's motion, that's the end of it. If the court grants the prosecutor's motion, it'll dismiss the venire, and jury selection starts anew.

You know I've been giving this some thought, and it kind of occurred to me, that none of their peers would actually be in the jury pool, for various reasons... :confused:

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13616
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Trial #1--The Retrial of Parker, Drexler, Lovelien, Stewart.

#100

Post by Notorial Dissent »

Techno Luddite wrote:
bob wrote:Jury of their peers, and all that.

* * *

"For the record," If the court denies the prosecutor's motion, that's the end of it. If the court grants the prosecutor's motion, it'll dismiss the venire, and jury selection starts anew.

You know I've been giving this some thought, and it kind of occurred to me, that none of their peers would actually be in the jury pool, for various reasons... :confused:
I can see where the whole voting, not being a felon thing could be an issue, that and not believing in the system to begin with or the whole believing it has any authority thing. :-D
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

Post Reply

Return to “Bundy Ranch/Malheur NWR”