On Tuesday, political prisoner Cliven Bundy filed a complaint against U.S. District Court Judge Gloria Navarro, U.S. Senator Harry Reid, the son of Harry Reid, Rory Reid and President Barack Obama for violating the Constitution by violating his Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel and For Speedy Trial, Eighth Amendment Right Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment (Mr. Bundy is currently being held in solitary confinement), Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms in Self-Defense, and First Amendment Right to Assemble in Self-Defense.
Bundy says that the defendants in the suit have engaged in “illegal, unconstitutional, intentional and malicious acts.” He adds that being placed in solitary confinement since his arrest amounts to “cruel and unusual punishment.”
In fact, Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore told Jim White and me on Northwest Liberty News radio that Bundy’s only communication was to put a cookie near his cell door in order to hear the guard say “Thank you” and him to be able to respond, “You’re welcome.”
“Defendant Harry Reid’s hand-picked Director of the Bureau of Land Management, Neil Kornze, a longtime Reid aide, at the direction of Defendant Harry Reid ordered and sent the equivalent of federal storm-troopers to Plaintiff Bundy’s ranch to seize his and his family’s land and capture and/or harm his cattle, at the direction of Defendant Harry Reid,” read the complaint. “These so called federal agents proceeded to threaten the lives of Defendant Bundy and his family at gunpoint, abuse and kill their cattle, including burying bulls in secret mass graves, and assaulting and tasing various Bundy family members to force them off the land.”
The complaint was filed by Attorney Larry Klayman, who was rejected by Judge Navarro from representing Bundy twice. Klayman also filed two exhibits with the complaint (You can see those here and here). The federal lawsuit seeks the removal of Judge Navarro from the case, allow Klayman to join Bundy’s defense team and seeks more than $50 million in damages.
“In short, defendant Navarro has shown her true intentions and bias and prejudice, rising to the level of denying Sixth Amendment right of counsel and to a speedy trial to plaintiff Bundy, following the ‘marching orders’ of her benefactors, defendants Harry Reid and Obama,” attorney Joel Hansen alleges in the complaint and alleges that Navarro is a “Latino activist.”
Harry Reid’s son, Rory, was also named in the suit, as he is the former Clark County Commissioner. Reid also ran unsuccessfully for Governor of Nevada in 2010. In fact, the complaint outlines a conspiracy against Bundy by the younger Reid, the elder Reid, Obama and Navarro.
While the White House has not commented on the lawsuit, Harry Reid’s office did call it “baseless and absurd.” That’s no surprise.
“Bundy, his sons and their believers have endangered the lives of federal officers, have defaced and damaged public lands and squandered public resources for their own benefit. They are domestic terrorists,” said Reid spokeswoman Kristen Orthman. “They are deadly and dangerous and will be brought to justice.”
The problem is that Ms. Orthman’s comments are baseless and absurd, and not only that, but she is following her boss in slandering the Bundys by calling them domestic terrorists. As I pointed out on Tuesday, with video evidence, the only ones who have “endangered lives” have been federal agents of the BLM and FBI, and we know the FBI aided the Oregon State Police in not only endangering lives, but taking one. It also appears the FBI is engaged in a coverup concerning the murder of LaVoy Finicum.
“Following the legal and constitutional stand-off, whereby plaintiff Bundy, his sons and other family members and supporters exercised their Second Amendment right of self-defense against the government, and succeeded in having the BLM agents and representatives leave the Bundy ranch unharmed, Plaintiff Bundy publicly equated his and his family’s situation to the plight of ‘Negroes’ in the old South, whereby they were enslaved by a tyrannical government as he and his family believed they were given the threats and violent attacks on his family members, his cattle and the Bundy’s supporters,” the court documents state. “He chose the word ‘Negro’ believing that this was a proper term for African-Americans, having looked up the word in Webster’s dictionary. He meant no disrespect and insult to African-Americans, particularly since he was equating his and his family’s plight with them. Indeed, the Reverend Martin Luther King referred to his people as ‘Negroes’ and he is recognized as the greatest African-American civil rights leader in American history.”
Oregon Live reports, “Federal prosecutor Steven Myhre dismissed as ‘outrageous, irrelevant and offensive’ the idea that there was ‘some grand conspiracy by political leaders to take over the land.'”
Yet, the fact is that the lands of the ranchers are valuable, tied to Agenda 21 and that Harry Reid has vested interest in the land in Nevada. Agenda 21 is clearly a conspiracy and Mr. Myhre may not like the term, but it is appropriate.
While Judge Navarro claims that case law won’t allow Bundy to create a conflict like his attorneys have filed, she did say that she will decide on May 25 as to whether she will step aside.
The problem here is not case law, its constitutional law. What does the Constitution say about how Bundy and the other political prisoners are being treated? Frankly, I think it’s abundantly clear that the Constitution is being trampled on and so are the rights of these men.