PUBLISHED: 3:49 AM 28 Feb 2017

As Oregon Prosecutors Claim Conspiracy, Defense Unveils Evidence Of Illegal FBI Acts Under Obama

Did Obama conspired with FBI authorizing illegal activities at protests to falsely charge ranchers?

More proof Obama conspired with FBI to conduct illegal activities at protests

Did Obama conspired with FBI authorizing illegal activities at protests to falsely charge ranchers?

When one hears of one incident of corruption within a federal agency, it can stand to reason it may have been a lone rogue employee gone bad. But when there are two and three reports of illegal activities within an agency there is a problem.

When the illegal activities involve the same people “investigating” the same “cases” or standing against a perceived “enemy” of the government then you have a conspiracy. A conspiracy against those legally exercising their right under the First Amendment to peaceably assemble and protest overreaching government agencies; one enforcing illegal ‘regulations” never voted on or approved by Congress or any state legislation.

Then we must ask: How far up the chain of command does the conspiracy go, and who ordered the now proven illegal activities of the FBI? Was it the local bureau chief in Oregon or were agents following the FBI chief at the helm of the federal agency in Washington D.C.? Were the attorney general and Department of Justice involved in this conspiracy?

Both FBI head Comy and AG at the time Lynch were getting daily briefings of the Oregon refuge occupation along with Obama.

Both FBI head Comey and AG at the time Lynch were getting daily briefings on the Oregon refuge occupation along with Obama. The use of federal resources like drones were authorized by them.

Did the President of the United States order an illegal crackdown using drone technology that led to the henchman style assassination of an American citizen who was referred to as “the Virus” by a US Congressman in a secretly taped conversation?

As more evidence is revealed in the Nevada Bundy standoff trial and two trials involving most of the same ranchers who stood up against illegal activities by the BLM in Oregon, what is the answer?

The answer appears to be yes on all accounts. And yet what will be done? Will Obama and his hand- picked FBI chief Comey and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch ever be held accountable?

A conspiracy to silence law abiding Americans pointing out to the American people illegal activities of federal agencies. Corruption that affects the freedoms and rights of all Americans as was the case in the western rancher’s stand at Oregon’s Malheur Refuge. A conspiracy to strike back in revenge against the same ranchers who through peaceful means forced the BLM to back down and return property it illegally confiscated without any due process of law.

The Oregon natural refuge is tax supported public property owned by the American people, and falls under the protection of the Constitution for people to gather and protest on the land, regardless of how the MSM and the federal government choose to mislead the American people.

The following video is an excellent breakdown of just the facts of the Oregon refuge occupation, and history leading up to the protest and the trumped up charges against the Hammond family and the protesting ranchers:

A jury already found five defendants not guilty in the first trial involving the ranchers’ protest including the Bundy brothers, Ammon and Ryan. In the first trial, it was brought to the jurors’ attention the FBI used paid “informants” to infiltrate the protest and then authorized illegal tactics and activities be used to incite violence and frame those there to peacefully voice a grievance. Activities the jurors found despicable and unconstitutional.

As reported here, jurors’ through an email exchange with OregonLive stated the prosecution failed to prove their “conspiracy” charges in explaining their unanimous decision to acquit. They also stated they were offended by the prosecution’s constant objection to the defense’s use of the Constitution as part of its strategy to show the defendants violated no laws.

Given the verdict and the reasons for the not guilty conclusion, one would think prosecutors and the FBI would go off somewhere to lick their wounds and call it day. They would drop charges against other protestors at the refuge who, according to jurors in the first trial, broke no laws. Wrong.

Last week, federal prosecutors moved forward with the second trial against more protestors, including Montana native Jake Payne. Payne received national attention because he, young and scared, decided to hide from the same authorities who had shot and killed rancher LaVoy Finacum even though Finacum stood with hands raised in compliance. A shooting now under investigation. Payne later turned himself into local law enforcement.

And though previous jurors specifically stated there was no proof of conspiracy prosecutors are once again pursuing “conspiracy” charges against the second round of defendants. Only this time prosecutors are putting a “new twist” on what defines a “conspiracy.”

According to OregonLive, prosecutors told jurors last week in opening arguments though there were no organized “meetings” which defines traditional conspiracy, a “meeting of minds” does prove there was a conspiracy.

What the hell? Now just “thinking” like others, sharing others’ political idealism, is conspiracy and a threat to the government according to assistant US Attorney, Geoffrey Barrow, who is prosecuting the case.

And it gets worse. The FBI, the same FBI that used undercover paid “informants” in the Nevada Bundy standoff, also used them in Oregon and again authorized and ordered those “informants” to break the law.

As reported here informants and agents under the direct orders of the FBI used alcohol to get ranchers drunk then incited them to make self-incriminating statements on video tapes that was allegedly for a “documentary.” The FBI set up a “fake” film company and lied to protestors, supplied them with booze, paid them money and then “coached” them to say things that would be “more” exciting and interesting to the “audience.”

And now prosecutors in Nevada are attempting to use the FBI’s “fake” documentary tapes against defendants in Nevada now in its second week of trial.

Does it not raise at least a small curiosity as to why both trials are suddenly being held simultaneously, one from the Nevada standoff and one from the Oregon protest? What else is the FBI trying to bury in the news cycle? Perhaps the fact it was their undercover agents who organized the activities in Oregon and not the ranchers?

The answer is yes, according to reports coming out of testimony in Oregon.

“FBI Special Agent Ronnie Walker, who was called by the government as a witness later in the day, was very clear. He testified that some informants were authorized to engage in “otherwise unlawful activity” during the occupation,” wrote Oregonlive on its website.

Walker’s testimony directly conflicts to what now “retired” FBI Special Agent Supervisor, Greg Bretzing. who was in charge at the Oregon standoff testified to earlier.

When directly asked during cross examination by the defense if any of the FBI agents and uncover informants were ordered or authorized to conduct illegal activities, Bretzing answered under sworn oath, he did not have any “direct knowledge.”

Now retired FBI special agent in charge Bretzing is responsible for the illegal roadblocks that led to the death of Finacum.

Now retired FBI special agent in charge Bretzing is responsible for the illegal roadblocks that led to the death of Finacum.

When questioned further Bretzing maintained he was in charge and “briefed” on the activities of those undercover agents.

So how is it a federal FBI agent running the show and responsible for handing down orders including “briefing” others, not know undercover agents were carrying out illegal activities ordered by the FBI?

Who is lying under oath? The ground agent Walker, who just follows his orders or Bretzing, the Oregon bureau chief in charge and holding daily phone conversations with chiefs in DC and the department of justice? Who has the most to lose?

The FBI is under investigation over the fatal Finacum shooting. An illegal roadblock set in a blind spot curve in an area known for no cell coverage using drone technology that former president Obama had already threatened to use against ranchers after the Nevada standoff gave the federal government a black eye in a humiliating defeat.

“I have one word for you boys, drones,” quipped Obama at a press correspondents dinner when talking about ranchers standing up for their rights.

Finacum’s spilt blood is on Bretzing hands and the hands at the top who had to silence the “Virus” from talking to others, educating others on how to use the Constitution to defeat the BLM legally through the local sheriff’s offices and court system. A tactic Finacum used and won in Arizona.

A voice of reason that was spreading across the internet and resonating with every day Americans, not just the western ranchers. So Bretzing used the trap to murder a man as he stood with hands in the air. Most would be charged with murder in such cases, but Bretzing gets to “retire” with full government pay and benefits the rest of his life gratis the tax payer.

Joining Bretzing is Loretta Lynch and former President Obama; all sitting cozy being kept by the taxpayer for years to come.

Yep, who has more to lose? This writer’s bet is, it isn’t special agent Walker who like a good soldier merely did his duty and followed his orders.