Comments on: Burns Chronicles No 23 – Terrorism Enhanced Penalties v. Due Process https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601 when the government is pointing their guns in the wrong direction Tue, 12 Sep 2017 12:58:21 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.2.4 By: BURNS CHRONICLES ARCHIVED (21-30) | Alternative Media https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-671500 Tue, 12 Sep 2017 12:58:21 +0000 http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-671500 […] Print […]

]]>
By: Burns Chronicles (No. 21 – 25) - The Last Bastille Blog https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-607851 Fri, 16 Sep 2016 05:46:06 +0000 http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-607851 […] XXIII. Terrorism Enhanced Penalties v. Due Process [8/10/16] […]

]]>
By: Outpost of Freedom » Blog Archive » Burns Chronicles No 24 – To Plea, or, Not To Plea https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-603193 Wed, 17 Aug 2016 04:48:40 +0000 http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-603193 […] explained in Terrorism Enhanced Penalties v. Due Process, they were facing what they believed to be a possible sentence of thirty years under the threat of […]

]]>
By: ghunt https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-603036 Mon, 15 Aug 2016 21:20:44 +0000 http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-603036 Some definitions provided by a reader:
LAW DICTIONARY (1856)
ADAPTED TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
AND OF THE
SEVERAL STATES OF THE AMERICAN UNION
With References to the Civil and Other Systems of Foreign Law
byJohn Bouvier

DISCRETION, practice.
1. When it is said that something is left to the discretion of a judge, it signifies that he ought to decide according to the rules of equity, and the nature of circumstances. Louis. Code, art. 3522, No. 13; 2 Inst. 50, 298; 4 Serg. & Rawle, 265; 3 Burr. 2539.

2. The discretion of a judge is said to be the law of tyrants; it is always unkown; it is different in different men; it is casual, and depends upon constitution, temper, and passion. In the best, it is oftentimes caprice; in the worst, it is every vice, folly, and passion, to which human nature is liable. Optima lex quae minimum relinquit arbitrio judicis: optimus judex qui minimum sibi. Bac. Aph; 1 Day’s Cas.. 80, ii.; 1 Pow. Mortg. 247, a; 2 Supp. to Ves. Jr. 391; Toull. liv. 3, n. 338; 1 Lill. Ab. 447.

TYRANNY, government. The violation of those laws which regulate the division
and the exercises of the sovereign power of the state. It is a violation of
its constitution.

TYRANT, government. The chief magistrate of the state, whether legitimate or
otherwise, who violates the constitution to act arbitrarily contrary to
justice. Toull. tit. prel. n. 32.
2. The term tyrant and usurper, are sometimes used as synonymous,
because usurpers are almost always tyrants; usurpation is itself a
tyrannical act, but properly speaking, the words usurper and tyrant convey
different ideas. A king may become a tyrant, although legitimate, when he
acts despotically; while a usurper may cease to be a tyrant by governing
according to the dictates of justice.
3. This term is sometimes applied to persons in authority who violate
the laws and act arbitrarily towards others. Vide Despotism.

Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition
Kangaroo Court. Term descriptive of a sham legal proceeding in which a person’s rights are totally disregarded and in which the result is a foregone conclusion because of the bias of the court or other tribunal.

]]>
By: Critical Reader https://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-602576 Thu, 11 Aug 2016 19:30:55 +0000 http://outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=1601#comment-602576 “The question arises, then, of just who, what person or persons, were intimidated or threatened by those that had moved in to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge?”

Those who had moved to the refuge attempted to hold a peaceful, prayerful protest against the treatment of the Hammonds.

It was the professional agitators who raced to the scene, who put out the “call to action” to bring armed personnel up there to threaten law enforcement, insisting they would go so far as to “escort” the FBI from the scene (presumably by compulsion). Threats were made, publicly and online, that the FBI would have military personnel crawling down their throats and up their backsides.

The Bundy family kicked the agitators out, hoping to avoid trouble, but that did not stop the agitators from getting busy escalating the situation, eliciting a predictable response from law enforcement personnel.

While agitators are driving the Black Lives Matter group into threatening police, the same is being done from within the patriot movement by infiltrators, rising to leadership positions, to create an excuse to crack down. And the crack-down is happening.

The set-up is plain to see.

There is a peaceful, non-threatening way to push back against infringement upon our rights. It is proven to work. Allowing the agitators to take leadership is not going to end well. The Bundy family apparently understood this.

]]>