Reporter Pete Santilli is facing trumped up charges by the central government in Nevada for simply reporting the news during the 2014 Bundy Ranch siege. However, he faced similar charges that were dismissed in Oregon. Now, Santilli is demanding the identity of an FBI agent, who apparently infiltrated the group in 2014, be released.
The Las Vegas Review and Journal reports:
Peter Santilli, a defendant in the Cliven Bundy standoff trial, asked a federal court Tuesday to order prosecutors to provide the identity of an undercover FBI agent.
The witness list prosecutors provided to the defense Monday gives only a pseudonym, “Charles Johnson,” not the agent’s true name. Santilli’s attorney said the agent’s identity is needed to prepare for cross-examination of the witness and any recorded information or logs the agent kept during the standoff are needed as well.
The federal government’s witness list remains under seal.
Defense attorney Chris Rasmussen filed the motion.
“The need to protect a law enforcement officer’s identity this late in the pretrial phase is nonexistent,” the motion reads. “This is not a case in which the government can cross their fingers and hope the defendants are going to enter pleas and they can forever protect his identity.”
“The identity and whereabouts of the agent is essential to the preparation of Santilli’s defense,” the motion continues. “Santilli requires the opportunity to test the agent’s credibility, ascertain his general relationship to others charged herein, discover the entire scope of his meetings, conversations and contacts with the principals herein, and to investigate the agent’s allegations.”
Rasmussen seemed bewildered at the government’s unwillingness to make know the agent’s name.
“I’ve never had a case where you kept the law enforcement officer’s name secret,” Rasmussen said.
Deb Jordan, Santilli’s co-host, posted her thoughts about the agent’s identity to Facebook. She wrote:
Attorneys are quick to point out the AGENT’S NAME used in court documents is a pseudonym, so don’t be fooled into thinking the AGENT is a man, however they suspect that it is.
The Prosecution says the AGENT does not live or work in the District of Nevada and works solely in a undercover capacity.
The person is an AGENT not an INFORMANT.
The person in question WOULD NOT have a criminal history.
This person would have probably been physically fit, possibly bragged about a Military or Law Enforcement background, and gotten very close to the family and other protestors in order to gather information.
It is EXTREMELY possible this person is or was a member of a III%, MILITIA, OATHKEEPER, or BORDER PATROL ORGANIZATION.
Jordan makes several good points about ascertaining the identity of the agent. Among some of the comments on her post, many point out that the FBI has infiltrated many patriot groups. Sadly, I wish they were as concerned about Muslims and obvious lawbreakers such as Hillary Clinton as they are about those who are simply standing for the Constitution and freedom.
In all of this, it seems to me that if a person has a right to face his accuser, and yes that is biblical, then the agent should be openly identified and have to take the stand under penalty of perjury. This nonsense that government is the accuser and not an individual is a smoke and mirrors act to bring injustice, not justice.
I join the defendants in calling for the any and all unnamed agents or informants to be identified so that they are marked and known for being the Judases to the Constitution and their fellow Americans that they are!