Cliven Bundy Wins: Judge Cites ‘Flagrant’ Federal Misconduct

by David French January 9, 2018 11:00 AM @DavidAFrench

In April 2014, America was transfixed by an armed standoff in the Nevada desert. On one side was a collection of dangerous, out-of-control armed men who were deliberately provocative, prone to saying unhinged things in a single-minded quest to destroy their enemies, and who lied time and again to cover their misdeeds.

 

On the other side was Cliven Bundy. If you think that’s an unfair and inflammatory attack on the federal government, consider that yesterday a federal judge, Obama appointee Gloria Navarro, dismissed the federal government’s criminal case against Bundy and two of his sons on the basis that the government was guilty of “flagrant misconduct” in the trial. Its conduct was so “outrageous” that “no lesser remedy” than dismissal with prejudice “is sufficient...........Federal judges do not dismiss federal prosecutions lightly, and Obama appointees are hardly known to carry water for right-wing militias. .....Read more

 

My Take - It's been obvious federal agents and attorney deliberately violated the Constitutional rights of these people - which seems to me to be illegal! If it's illegal it must be a crime!  When someoine commits a crime they're supposed to be arrested and prosecuted!  Right?  If all that's so - and this ruling seems to say that very clearly - I want to know when someone is going to be charged with a crime?  Is Sessions listening?

As By Richard McCarty and Printus LeBlanc say in their article, DOJ misconduct in Nevada in Bundy case:

"This is an all to familiar pattern of federal government misconduct. It seems not one week goes by without a story about federal prosecutors not turning over Brady material. Attorney General Jeff Sessions must hold officials accountable. He inherited a corrupt DOJ that apparently has never heard of the Constitution. Prosecutors involved in malicious prosecutions, like this one, must be made to pay the lawyer fees of the defense and should be disbarred."

 Oh, one more thing.  If what they did is illegal at the federal level, wouldn't some of what they did be illegal at the state level?  If that's so - and this ruling seems to say that very clearly - what are state law enforcement officials going to do?