Facebook Removes 559 Pages, 251 Accounts Spreading U.S. Misinformation
Six Months after my post "Buying Elections - Using Facebook Data Mining Social Media Propaganda & Activist Group" and One Day! after my post "Evidence Congress Approval Of Using Propaganda On The American People In Bundy Ranch & Beyond -The Smith Mundt Act" where congress sanctioned the governments ability to propagandize the American People! My account was suspended/locked on Twitter. Now, Facebook champions themselves as the "hero" in saving America from "click-bait" and "fake news" employing more harsh tactics than were deployed against my personal Facebook page in 2012. I was posting articles and videos about the truth in local and national politics and the elites plans to control everyone and everything only to find them removed from my wall! I would re-post them, and BOOM! Gone again! I did some investigating on Facebook and came to the conclusion that they weren't just "innocently" removing my posts, considered "dangerous" to the public, but they were most likely a CIA operation, so I closed my account and left.
A month ago Twitter "suspended" my twitter account @PatriotParrot "claiming" it was a bot or I was "bullying" or I was posting "spam". I tried to contact them by email to prove a "bot" would not send and email specifically defending my fourth amendment and proving I was none of the above. They sent a response telling me "they don't monitor their email account" and to contact them via Twitter. Such an approach from a company like Twitter is appalling! Not to mention my reminding them that they are part of the "public square" in which our right to freedom of speech should be guaranteed. Just today I received notification that I had 11 new followers ALL championing "crypto currency" in their bio ALL created in September of 2018, now THIS is evidence that Twitter will "allow" "bots" and "spam" accounts to exist if it fits their agenda! It is with this outrage that I post the news about Facebook purging accounts for these very same reasons. Several outlets carried the news.
Just in time for midterms, Facebook has removed 559 pages and 251 accounts they claim have been spreading misinformation and spam. Several of the pages however - some with millions of followers, were pro-Trump conservatives who had spent years cultivating their followings.
Facebook has unpublished our page
After 5 years of building fans Facebook has officially unpublished our page (3.1 million fans) so we can't post on it anymore. This is truly an outrage and we are devastated. We will do everything we can to recover our page and fight back. — Free Thought Project (@TFTPROJECT) October 11, 2018
I’ve been memory holed from FaceBook! 350k followers poof gone! There is a dangerous precedent being set here where the big tech companies have appointed themselves as the gate keepers of political thought and opinion! Retweet this if you care about free-speech! #FreeDicks — Dan Dicks (@DanDicksPFT) October 11, 2018
Our @facebook page with over 2.1 million followers has been unpublished, along with over 800 other pages and accounts. The purge of alt-media is upon us. pic.twitter.com/6Q2oswVpBI— Anti-Media (@AntiMedia) October 11, 2018
I'd like to post the tweet from @AntiMedia but Twitter has suspended their account at the time of this post.
Facebook claims that "domestic actors" have been creating "fake pages and accounts to attract people with shocking political news," reports Bloomberg.
"The people behind the activity also post the same click-bait posts in dozens of Facebook Groups, often hundreds of times in a short period, to drum up traffic for their websites," Facebook said in a Thursday blog post. "And they often use their fake accounts to generate fake likes and shares. This artificially inflates engagement for their inauthentic pages and the posts they share, misleading people about their popularity and improving their ranking in news feed."
Some pages Facebook removed had large followings of real and fake accounts. Nation in Distress, a conservative meme page, was followed by more than 3 million people, according to the Internet Archive, which stores historical versions of websites and other online content.
Facebook has removed "559 Pages and 251 accounts" in the US "that have consistently broken our rules against spam and coordinated inauthentic behavior." They include:
-Nation in Distress -Reasonable People Unite -The Resistance -Reverb Press -Right Wing News -Snowflakes
That said, not all of the accounts with large followings were conservative; Reverb Press, for example, had over 700,000 followers and constantly attacked President Trump and Republicans, who they referred to as "cheating scumbags."
A third left-leaning page, Reasonable People Unite, posted a screen shot of a Twitter user who said, “Somewhere in America, a teenage girl is listening to her parents defend Brett Kavanaugh and she is thinking to herself, if something like that happens to me, I have nowhere to go." -Washington Post
The digital nanny state strikes again...
First they came for Alex Jones and now @facebook has taken down @DanDicksPFT Press For Truth page! This is insanity, Dan has been one of the most inspirational and rational independent journalists of our era! @DewsNewz @PrisonPlanet @LeighStewy @PressForTruth — Jason Bermas (@JasonBermas) October 11, 2018
American's should be outraged at the violation of our Fourth Amendment as it relates to the Public Square today, Social Media = Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and others. Our Congressmen should be doing everything they can to protect that right! Senator Lee, Senator Hatch (and his replacement), Representative John Curtis, I am holding you responsible for action against this censorship! But I am adamantly against regulation. When a crime is committed the wheels of justice should start turning, and in this case, the DOJ should get involved.
"UpGuard, a cybersecurity firm, found troves of user information hiding in plain sight, inadvertently posted publicly on Amazon.com Inc.’s
cloud computing servers. The discovery shows that a year after the
Cambridge Analytica scandal exposed how unsecure and widely disseminated
Facebook users’ information is online, companies that control that
information at every step still haven’t done enough to seal up private
data.
"In one instance, Mexico City-based digital platform Cultura Colectiva,
openly stored 540 million records on Facebook users, including
identification numbers, comments, reactions and account names. The
records were accessible and downloadable for anyone who could find them
online.
"Another database for a long-defunct app called At the Pool listed names, passwords and email addresses for 22,000 people".
*Google is telling me they "unpublished" this Article on August 12, 2022. Their guidelines state that I can see it but no one else will. Please post a comment to let me know if you can see it. Thanks!
On October 5, 2018 The Reporters Committee For Freedom Of The Press Released information regarding a FOIA Request they submitted in conjunction with their law suit regarding undercover impersonation of members of the media. The Federal Bureau Of Investigations released a portion of the record requested by the RCFP outlining the agencies guidelines for impersonating members of the news media which reveal that the practice requires high level approval from the Justice Department and the FBI. During the Bundy Ranch Trials it was revealed that a fake documentary crew garnered interviews with several of the Defendants in the three cases where they asked the protestors inflammatory questions about the Bureau Of Land Management who played a pivotal roll in the Stand Off, offering interviewees liquor and candy to excess, ultimately capturing interviews by those they had intoxicated which resulted in what is equivalent to life sentences for two of the defendants. The article released by RCFP references the phony film crew, Longbow Productions and specific others who obtained this high government approval, it states in part:
"Newly public Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) documents outline for the first time the specifics of the agency's guidelines for impersonating members of the news media in undercover activities and operations. The records detail, among other things, that such activities require high-level approval from within the FBI and Justice Department. The FBI released the guidelines after the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit when the agency failed to respond to a request for records about its impersonation of documentary filmmakers, specifically. Additionally, records recently released in connection with a separate FOIA lawsuit filed by the Reporters Committee show that the FBI has engaged in the impersonation of documentary filmmakers on a number of occasions, though questions remain as to just how frequently the FBI relies on this tactic.
The FBI has engaged in the undercover impersonation of members of the news media for decades, but controversy surrounding the practice was amplified in 2015 after it was revealed that the agency created a fake news article attributed to the Associated Press (AP) during the course of its June 2007 investigation of a student suspected of sending bomb threats to his high school outside Seattle, Washington. The revelation sparked an outcry from the press and public, including inquiries from high-ranking members of Congress who expressed concern that the impersonation of journalists undermines the credibility and independence of those reporting on matters of significant public importance.
In defense of the practice, then-FBI Director James Comey submitted a letter to the editor to The New York Times acknowledging the tactic and stating that the FBI's impersonation of an AP journalist in the Seattle investigation "was proper and appropriate[.]" The controversy also led the Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General to investigate the FBI's use of media impersonation in the Seattle investigation. In September 2016, the office issued a formal report noting that the FBI had prepared new guidelines setting forth "approval levels for sensitive circumstances specifically in situations in which [FBI] employees represent, pose, or claim to be members of the news media or a documentary film crew."
The guidelines obtained by the Reporters Committee detail that approval process: The relevant FBI field office must submit an application to the Undercover Review Committee at FBI headquarters and it must be approved by the FBI Deputy Director after consultation with the Deputy Attorney General. The guidelines do not provide any criteria the FBI Deputy Director and/or the Deputy Attorney General must consider when approving these undercover activities.
The guidelines also define an "undercover activity" as any investigative activity involving the use of an assumed identity by an undercover employee, and an "undercover operation" as one that involves a "series of related undercover activities" — defined as five or more substantive contacts by an undercover employee with the individuals under investigation — over a period of time.
Though the FBI has repeatedly disclosed that its agents have impersonated members of the news media to further their investigations, important questions remain about how often this practice is used. Reporters Committee attorneys are currently involved in two matters seeking more information about the FBI's use of media impersonation.
The Reporters Committee scored an important victory late last year when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that the FBI had failed to sufficiently search for records responsive to FOIA requests made by the Reporters Committee and the AP. The case is currently on remand to the district court, where the FBI has produced records that make clear that the FBI has engaged in the impersonation of members of the news media — including documentary filmmakers — in criminal investigations on multiple occasions. In released emails, FBI employees question whether the agency's new policies regarding impersonation of members of the news media "apply only to future [undercover operations], or apply retroactively to ongoing [undercover operations] that have already been approved with the documentary film crew scenario?" Similarly, another released email notes the existence of "a number of communications to HQ components and the field in 2016 regarding the use of 'documentary' and similar type scenarios in undercover operations."
Most recently, the Reporters Committee sued the Justice Department and the FBI after the agencies failed to respond to a FOIA request for records related to the FBI's impersonation of documentary filmmakers. The Reporters Committee filed the FOIA request after it was revealed in court that FBI agents posed as filmmakers in order to interview suspects as part of its investigation into a 2014 armed standoff between the Bureau of Land Management and supporters of cattle rancher Cliven Bundy, and used "professional credentials, websites and business cards" to lend their fake documentary film company — Longbow Productions — the appearance of authenticity.
In response to part of that FOIA request, the FBI has asserted what is known as a "Glomar" response, refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records related to other instances in which it has impersonated documentary filmmakers during the course of its investigations. In support of its argument, in a recent filing the FBI went so far as to argue that disclosing these records "would allow criminals to judge whether they should completely avoid any contacts with documentary film crews, rendering the investigative technique ineffective."
In response, the Reporters Committee argued that this is precisely the reason why disclosure of information regarding FBI media impersonation is so important: this tactic has a chilling effect on journalists and documentary filmmakers, and sources are less likely to speak candidly to members of the news media if they think that the journalist is an agent of the government. Further, the Reporters Committee argues that the FBI cannot issue a Glomar response in this case because its practice of media impersonation is already well-known to the public and the FBI has already officially acknowledged the existence of these records — two standards the court will consider in evaluating whether the FBI's Glomar response to part of the FOIA request was appropriate.
Along with the legal arguments in the case, the Reporters Committee submitted signed affidavits from two documentary filmmakers — David Byars and Abby Ellis — who explained how the FBI's use of media impersonation has made it more difficult for them to do their jobs.
In particular, Ellis believes that "the FBI's impersonation of a documentary film crew could have put [her] in danger," and that "the FBI's use of that tactic continues to jeopardize [her] safety, and the safety of other, real investigative filmmakers."
The FBI has until Oct. 12 to respond to the Reporters Committee’s arguments".
This case is evidence that the program to propagandize the people is WELL underway and does not protect the American People's right to a free press! As Reporters Committee For A Free Press states, this covert program is making it difficult for documentary film makers and reporters alike to obtain access to the people to report "the news" because it has made the American People fearful of entrapment and prosecution. This is only one of many cases, and it is my opinion that not only was it employed in the Bundy Ranch case but also in the Malhuer Refuge event in Burns Oregon, Harney County, in one case in particular with whom I will call the master of ceremonies, although not the only instance.
The American People deserve to have their right to a free press protected, not exploited to their detriment. We must be vigilant to expose these government lies and manipulations whenever, and wherever found.
Mentioning Agenda 21 and Its Action Plan Sustainable Development Are Synonymous To Talking About Aliens and Spaceships - But that's the way media, politicians and Corporations want it.
Many readers who find themselves here on this site may wonder what does being imprisoned for building a pond on your property, being held in prison without bail or waiting for over a year for a trial, being abused in prison, cattle grazingcontrolling the weather or facebook and so on, and so on, and so on have to do with Agenda 21 Sustainable Development? If you listen to the main media, corporatists and politicians they will tell you, "that's just how crazy these people are, it's their reason for everything they don't like. Don't listen to them, they have no idea what they are talking about! There is no 'secret plan', and WE should know"! A 2012 Reuters Article is a good example of this. The writer Nick Carey interviews several Tea Party activists in states like Iowa, Texas, South Carolina and Tennessee among others, including interviewing those who sounded the alarm on Agenda 21 like John Anthony, Heather Gass and the Republican National Convention which resulted in Carey peppering his article that was picked up by The Huffington Post with terms like "grand conspiracy", "communist hunters", "anti-sustainable" and "un-hinged wacko nut jobs" throwing a net of "conservative tea partiers" over them all and quoting politicians and the Chamber of Commerce and ICLEI saying, "this U.N. Agenda does not exist" and by opposing it they are hurting the economy and refusing homes to the homeless masses and denying global warming calling it a "wrong-headed approach". The article also uses the U.S. Census Bureau's "prediction" that the population will double by 2050, what I like to call the "population bomb", it's their virtual ticking time bomb and so we better get building and reordering society so we are ready once it explodes! I haven't been able to find any of my local politicians that don't use this scare tactic. Don't forget to look at the "tea party smear campaign" linked to in the article. Remember the Lois Lerner attack on the Tea Party? Conspiracy Theory this! Casey also interviewed the American Planning Association. They are known as the "head of the spear" where Agenda 21's Sustainable Development deployment is concerned. The APA was subsidized heavily in its campaign to completely reorder modern society as we know it envisioned by the U.N. Globalists.
It is worthy of noting that Nick Casey did an interview in preparation for his article with Rosa Koire in which he name drops some of the people and places he met them in his article, but did not even mention his interview with Rosa in his article. Why? Rosa has as reputable of a reputation and knowledge of Agenda 21 as Michael Coffman, Henry Lamb, Tom DeWeese, Ron Paul, Michael Shaw, Heather Gass, John Anthony, Stan Monteath, Christopher Monckton and Ted Gunderson. Rosa did a very good job at dispelling rumor and getting him to relinquish the type casting he was doing, but he wouldn't abandon his disparagement of the Tea Party as if it was bad thing. Although Koire described herself as a Democrat who has spoken at Tea Party gatherings, she uncovered the agenda while doing work in her field of property evaluation and assessment. It was as big of a shock to her as it is to all of us. Koire described well how it came about and how it is moving forward in real ways. She told Casey, "these are not my words, these are theirs", in describing the "why" this plan must be implemented. Koire told them, "Agenda 21 is not a term [we] came up with, the United Nations named it that". She told Casey that we are not all "crazies", we are telling people what is printed in their plan of sustainability. Koire challenged Casey, telling him he had a great opportunity, to tell the truth about the agenda and those individuals and organizations that are playing a pivotal role in implementing it. He finished his interview asking Koire for a list of "other nut cases" around the country he could talk to. Rosa reminded him about her website and her book where he could find source documents and cliff notes version of the plan, but in the end she found just another smear article instead. It fit well within the Huffington Post conspiracy theory agenda. It is important that we continue to talk about it since its increasingly gaining a foot-hold and working its way into a strangle-hold upon the neck of the American people and our way of life. Rosa reminded Casey that she refers to Agenda 21 as the green mask, not because [we] are scary but because it is!
We are not talking about green aliens taking over our planet, just those green with envy and power hungry elites in America and around the world who want to eliminate the middle class and enslave us all. Remember its written in their plans and you are feeling it in your pocketbook, in restrictions of every kind and imprisonment ignored by government at all levels. It is true that although the APA's servey says only six percent of their sample of Americans oppose Agenda 21 we must be having some impact on the plan because they keep changing the language associated with their agendas and groups, while still hiding behind the skirt of others. They changed the name under the Obama administration to Agenda 2030 and ICLEI has changed their name to Local Governments for Sustainability because, who is not for sustainability? We challenge all skeptics to learn the truth about the agenda and who is behind it, the list is exhaustive but you can find significant portions here and here. Learning about these people and their corporations will help you in seeing HOW they are implementing the agenda first and foremost in your town/city, county and state. Watch it expand across America and around the world. We are deep into it here in my state of Utah, although our legislature passed a resolution banning Agenda 21 in our state. I have personally witnessed the passing of clearly Agenda 21 legislation despite the resolution barring its implementation, two of which were passed on the day I was there, one associated with U.S. Congressman Chris Stewart. It was so blatant in the language itself lawmakers were completely oblivious to what it was saying, or were they? Let's control the narrative by continuing to reveal their plans to all that will hear. The mainstream media will always try to paint us as "wackos" but it doesn't change the facts. The best place to start is in your community. Speak up, write letters, pass out fliers, there are still a lot of people out there who are so caught up in the distraction of Washington Politics that they aren't focusing on what's going on in their own back yard. Like Rosa Koire said, "this is not a conspiracy theory Nick, this is a conspiracy fact"! Join us! Start here, start somewhere. The world needs American's to expose this corruption and defeat it before it's too late.
Listen to the interview Reuters conducted with well-known Agenda 21 expert Rosa Koire below.
Todd Engel, Bundy Ranch Defendant, Sentenced Using Government Claims Unrelated To Charges To Which He Was Convicted.
July 19, 2018
Federal Court Las Vegas Nevada
If "speech" is a crime we may all be guilty, depending on who is making the rules. It was a report by Cambridge Analytica that brought Mark Zuckerberg to testify before Congress in which he had to admit he and the team he employs was playing favorites with topics, groups and individuals who met Facebook criterion for progressive/left leaning views, while censoring others who were more conservative. Although Facebook left videos up of individuals, who were committing REAL crimes like the group who kidnapped a mentally disabled individual and hazed them on Facebook Live, people like Diamond and Silk were deemed "unsafe" by Facebook. Now that Social Media is our modern day "town square" government officials of all ranks seek to silence The People from speaking their mind.
Diamond and Silk labeled "Unsafe" by Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook
Judge Gloria Navarro presided in the Sentencing Hearing for Todd Engel (Idaho) for a conviction rendered him in Trial #1 of the Tier #3 (The Gunmen) portion of the Bundy Ranch Trial or the Standup At Bunkerville Nevada 2014 where Engel received a guilty verdict on charges of Obstruction Of Justice and Interstate Travel & Aide To Extortion,neither of which are firearms related, nor do they have enhancements attached. Yet the prosecutors are trying to sidestep the actual trial, and sentence him to serve time for crimes for which he was not convicted.
On October 8, 2017 Todd Engel wrote to supporters outlining the details of his Pre-Sentencing Report explaining how the Probation Office did the Prosecutions bidding in including sentencing guidelines that were not included in the Jury's verdict recommending Engel serve time for crimes he was never guilty of.
The courtroom was packed today with BLM Agents, FBI and Secret Service and supporters were seated on both sides of the gallery. Today the Prosecution Team Consisting of Steven Myhre, Daniel Schiess and Nadia Ahmed who used this very report to garner a sentence for Todd for 14 years! Most of the evidence presented by the Prosecutors in court at sentencing consisted largely of Todd Engel's Facebook posts, some of which were NOT posted by Engel but by others using his account. In Todd's defense, in his own words, he accepted responsibility for them though he pointed out to Judge Navarro nothing he said was of a violent or threatening manner and asserted his inalienable right to the First Amendment. Todd's Attorney, Warren Markowitz stood to defend his client by reminding Judge Navarro that Engel was in constant communication with the Nevada Highway Patrol on the bridge over the wash, did not threaten anyone and pointed his firearm at no one. Markowitz was successful at getting the term "sniper" stricken from the documents, as Engel, along with hundreds of others, traveled to the wash expecting to see the cattle released when surprised to find the Bureau of Land Management and National Parks Service in a military formation with weapons drawn. Engel simply asked NHP if they were aware of this and ultimately ducked behind a jersey barrier for cover, "no weapons pointing" in the words of Dan Love.
The Prosecution used the Facebook post of Cliven Bundy telling the public what was transpiring at his ranch for several days when the BLM accosted Davey Bundy, apprehended him after throwing him to the ground and grinding his face into the gravel on the shoulder of the road and interrogating him at a BLM office then driving him one and a half hours to Las Vegas hoping to find a way to imprison him but kicking him to the curb a day later with only a sack lunch. Cliven told the public about the "First Amendment Area" the BLM had erected with construction fencing off a distant freeway exit far from the Bundy property and pestered people all across the Bunkerville area to go to the area if they had something to say, "the public land was not a place to do it". The public saw video posted by many, of Margaret Houston being approached from the back and body-slammed to the ground by an out of control BLM Agent and Ammon Bundy tased three times as the crowd help fight off the electrified barbs while attack dogs were sicked on the people, but the Prosecution insisted that just by the public "liking" and "sharing" a Facebook post and showing up to support and defend the Bundy's against a clearly tyrannical government with firearms, this, was "threatening" to Law Enforcement, who Schiess told the Judge were a "protected class" and above the law. It was very clear throughout the hearing that the government, including Judge Gloria Navarro, was hell-bent on making Todd Engel an "example" to scare off the hopes of anyone else ever standing up to a tyrannical government. This was evident in the extremely harsh verdict handed down in court today.
It is evermore proof that the government, at all levels, considers The People guilty until proven innocent and, although a jury of your peers does not convict you, they will throw the book at you anyway. Proof of this was exhibited as the Prosecutors brought up EVERY minor offense Todd was ever accused of back to puberty, demonstrating how all your past deeds will come back to haunt you. One of the frustrating things about this hearing was that Daniel Schiess, who never presented ANY evidence in the trial Todd garnered convictions in, nor was he even a part of the Prosecution Team then, was allowed to present evidence not related to the convictions at all. He spoke of "truth, justice and the American way" and was allowed to bring forth the "restitution" bill presented not by evidence, but by using the fictitious "cattle grazing fees" owed to the government plus punitive damages suffered by the BLM and requiring Engel be responsible for paying them back, and if the Prosecution decides to swing it, require the other Defendants who entered into Plea Agreements, to pitch in. This was ultimately rescheduled for September 2018. The Prosecution finally had to admit that it wasn't about spending 2.5 -3.5 million to recover a 1 million dollar BLM cattle rustling operation it was about getting the cattle off the land. Scheiss accused Engel of trying to create another Ruby Ridge or Waco telling the Judge how Engel made demands of the BLM and threatened them "if they didn't back down this would continue". Schiess told the court "we are a nation of laws" and "we solve our disputes in the courtroom" and "Police Officers and Law Enforcement are a privileged class with special protection". Scheiss also told the Judge that Engel should suffer for not telling everyone on Facebook that the information Cliven was telling the public was not correct, despite there being BLM snipers on and around the Bundy Ranch for months prior to the day at the wash. Scheiss also told the Judge that Engel made a visit to his local County Sheriff and told him he was "ready to wage a war with the Federal Government", yet NONE of this was presented as evidence in Todd's trial. Schiess brought up the fact that Engel attended the protest at Sugar Pine Mine, where again, no one was hurt or injured, and how he traveled to Malheur Wildlife Refuge where LaVoy Finicum was assassinated by Oregon State Police and their operatives. Schiess claims "they need a harsh sentence in order to have further respect for the law and law enforcement. In this country we have a society where we resolve our disputes peacefully and we respect the law. Obviously Todd Engel blames the Federal Government of where he is today". Scheiss claimed that "the feds, the BLM and the police where hurt by this experience". He told the Judge that Engel's actions were much worse than Jerry Delumus but closer to Greg Burleson's, who received 87 months and 68 years respectfully. Scheiss said that Engel made threats and that "victims need justice which is a part of the judicial system".
Judge Gloria Navarro Obama Appointee Harry Reid Puppet.
Todd Engel stood to plead his own defense against the PSR and was told by Judge Gloria Navarro that he doesn't have the right to speak that his Attorney should speak for him. Todd told the Judge "I would not be here today if I had not made those posts on Facebook. I posted stuff on Facebook and it's going to put me in prison"! Judge Navarro told Engel he is "still in denial and needs a therapist". She silenced him right away, like she always does, and used this against him in his sentencing since he insisted on defending himself against the charges in the report. Judge Navarro handed down the sentence of 168 months. Todd's Attorney Warren Markowitz stood to defend Todd arguing that there is evidence being presented in this Hearing that was not presented at trial and that the person who wrote the damage report was not a part of the investigation. Markowitz continued telling the court "we are a nation of laws and rules but we are also a nation of rebels. We are a nation who stand and protest against injustice, this is the very core of our founding. The People rise to show the government WHO they work for, and Todd is respectful of the law. He goes to protest because he believes in our country and that the government DOES work for The People".
Todd Engel was escorted out of the courtroom and while exiting said, "freedom isn't free, and this is not over"! Markowitz will appeal the case in which the government is not a victim, there were no shots fired and no one was injured.
If there are any Grand Jury or Trial Jury Members from this case, please listen to this plea for help on behalf of Todd Engel and the other men convicted or entered into plea deals. It is very important that you hear the certified evidence of this case so that may set these innocent men free. Please visit this link.
"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me".
After the court hearing Kelli Cooper, sister of Todd Engel, released the following statement:
"Judge Navarro would not let family speak yesterday so I will speak now and forever until this wrong is made right.
Todd was not the one in a law enforcement uniform throwing an unarmed, defenseless woman to the ground.
Todd was not the one in a law enforcement uniform grinding a mans face in the gravel for simply taking pictures by the side of the road.
Todd was not the one in a law enforcement uniform pointing weapons at unarmed women and children.
Todd was not the one in a law enforcement uniform making fun of the protesters physical appearances and picking out which ones they were going to kill first.
Todd was the one on the bridge begging for help from the ones in a law enforcement uniform. The same ones who testified under oath that he was “helpful.”
THE UNIFORM DOES NOT MAKE THE MAN-THE MAN MAKES THE UNIFORM".
Sign the petition for a Presidential Pardon of the the remaining Defendants who entered into Plea Agreements and are serving time in relation to the Bundy Ranch Case. In my opinion, Micah McGuire should be added to this petition.
Update- September 20, 2018 - Here is an outline of restitution owed by Todd Engel according to Judge Gloria Navarro's order.
Docket Text:
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS - Restitution Hearing as to Todd C. Engel held on 9/20/2018 before Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro. Crtrm Administrator: Aaron Blazevich; AUSA: Daniel Schiess with FBI Agent Mike Abercrombie; Def Counsel: Warren Markowitz; Court Reporter/Recorder: Araceli Bareng; Time of Hearing: 9:20 a.m. - 10:01 a.m.; Courtroom: 7D;
"Defendant is present in custody with leg restraints. The Court makes preliminary statements. Mr. Markowitz makes arguments regarding his position on restitution. Mr. Schiess responds. The Court finds that restitution is mandatory in this case. The Court determines that the Defendant's ability to pay restitution will not be taken into consideration in this case. Mr. Markowitz makes arguments regarding the inability of government employee wages and costs to be imposed as restitution. The Court finds that the expenses were necessary to complete or attempt to complete the operation which is at issue in the indictment."
The Court imposes the following amounts of restitution:
BLM Costs:
BLM Labor Costs: $518,955.97.
BLM Contract Costs: $1,025,542.53.
TOTAL BLM Costs: $1,544,498.50.
FBI Costs:
FBI Las Vegas Employee Costs: $62,255.31.
FBI Los Angeles Employee Costs: $18,405.07.
FBI Los Angeles Travel Costs: $11,631.45.
TOTAL FBI Costs: $92,291.83.
TOTAL Amount of Restitution Ordered: $1,636,790.33
"The Court orders and imposes restitution and associated conditions. Amended Judgment to follow. Mr. Markowitz makes an oral motion to stay restitution pending appeal. The Court DENIES the motion. Mr. Markowtiz requests the Defendant be allowed to change his facility designation on the Amended Judgment to FCI Sheridan as Mr. Engel's family is moving closer to this location and Mr. Engel has allergies at the current facility. The Court will amend its recommendation to the US Bureau of Prisons on the Amended Judgment. The Court adjourns. Defendant is remanded to custody.
What's missing is the over $160,000 a year interest on the restitution which would bring it to over 5 million dollars by the time he's released".
I continue to look for the actual document on the above proceedings, I only quote what was reported in several publications.
Update- Todd Engel recently penned a letter dated September 18, 2018 entitled "A Long Train Of Abuses". Read it here.
Update- October 24, 2018 Todd Engel's Attorney Warren Markowitz gives an update on Todd's case.
Update - December 12, 2018
Update - November 21, 2019 The Appeal Brief is filed and available for download at
Docs.FreeToddEngel.com and the government has until the 20th of May to
respond. Expecting the oral arguments for Todd's appeal to be sometime in the 1st quarter of the coming year (2020).
Update - Todd Engel case scheduled for opening arguments May 28, 2020. You can tune in online for proceedings. When I get the link I'll post it. Listen to an update from his Attorney below.
Update - May 28, 2020 Warren Markowitz appeared before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals via phone, while the Prosecuting Attorney Adam Flake appeared via internet where he and Judges William A. Fletcher, Jay Scott Bybee and Paul J. Watford all appeared on camera from their offices due to the COVID19 Crisis. Markowitz began by establishing several points he would like the Judges to consider. Number one, that the Standby Counsel, which Judge Gloria Navarro abruptly required to represent Todd during his Nevada trial, was a "Structural Defect" and denied Todd his Sixth Amendment Right to "be confronted with the witnesses against him; the compulsory process for obtaining witnesses", known as the Compulsory Clause. Number two, denial of a New Trial Motion based on the Dismissal by Judge Navarro of the Tier 1 Defendants (Trial #3). Third, a Review and dismissal of the financial obligations for Restitution based on an improper calculation by the government. And finally, this is what Markowitz dedicated his time to while the others had but only a brief mention; denial of Engel's right to direct his trial as he saw fit, via the Sixth Amendment right to represent himself. Markowitz emphasized that the court was in "fear" of a mistrial. He testified that Judge Navarro held a Faretta Hearing which was used to convince Engel "it would be dangerous to move ahead without Counsel." Markowitz told how Judge Navarro told Todd before the Jury that "if [you] ask a question wrong you may have your right to self represent revoked." What brought this on in Todd's Trial was the fact that he brought up the subject of a "Criminal Investigation" in regards to Bureau of Land Management employee Dan Love. Judge Watford brought up this point in the hearing asking Markowitz if Engel was warned about what he was or wasn't allowed to so or say in his own defense? Markowitz was not prepared to answer specifics in regards to this question. Watford pointed to the fact that Engel asked a witness about an "investigation" that didn't exist. You must understand that the "law" is about WORDS and PUNCTUATION! So, the Judge is driving home the fact that Dan Love was not technically under "investigation", but an IOG Report on Love's criminal behavior during the Burning Man Festival. The Investigation began in 2015 where Dan Love threatened fellow employees, among other things. So, Love was technically not facing a Criminal Investigation. Judge Watford asked Markowitz if it was improper to relieve Engel of his right to represent himself the rest of the afternoon? Markowitz responded, "yes." Watford asked, "because?" Markowitz, "the Court was already weighing mistrial and making Engel sit down and installing Standby Counsel." Markowitz also told how the Judge did not inform the Jury of what was taking place and why. "It made Engel look guilty." He also testified to the fact that Standby Counsel made it known that he was there for the Court alone! This resulted in the Structural Error and denied Engel control over his own defense, as Standby was being used as a "filter." Markowitz emphasized that Brady should be considered, but Standby Counsel appointment infringed on Engel's Sixth Amendment Right. U.S. Department of Justice Adam Flake had his turn to defend the governments claim that Judge Navarro was justified in her abrupt censure of Todd Engel in his own defense, sighting that Engel had filed for the OIG Report on Dan Love stating there was an "investigation" over it. Flake acknowledged that fact that USDOJ was not going to call Dan Love, in order to keep him from being questioned by Engel. He noted that "the defense wanted to call Love in an effort to impeach him, because he was the subject of an IOG Investigation." Flake claimed that because Engel used the term "criminal investigation" he should be disqualified from representing himself, also admitting Engel was not told directly that he could not bring up the subject of Love's Investigation. Flake said, " it was out of left field", telling the Court none of the other Defendants would be allowed to call Dan Love either. Judge Bybee engaged in grilling Flake about the fact that Engel was not specifically asked not to ask the witness about Dan Love's "investigation". Judge Bybee told Flake he could find no record in the transcript where Engel was specifically told not to go there saying, "how is this revoking Engel's right to self represent a proportional response under ANY of the cases dealing with Faretta Rights?" Flake responded, " Navarro thought it was clear to Engel he was not to bring up Dan Love's investigation." Bybee continued, "doesn't this type of thing happen, a defendant asking a question they probably shouldn't have asked because the district court had told them not to? Doesn't that type of thing happen all the time?" Flake, laughing and grinning said, "it happens all the time of course, but it is special because of the length of the trial, the amount of litigation specifically on Dan Love." Judge Bybee, "why not turn to the Jury and say, ignore the question? This happens all the time." Flake responded, "I think the court was in its discretion to do so, but I want to emphasize, the courts decision was based on HOW the trial played out." Judge Bybee, "do you know of any case where someones Faretta Rights were suspended rather than taken away? He could have come back and represented himself." Flake, "I don't know of any case like that. If it was an error, it was structural error, it was not harmless, but Navarro felt Engel would not follow her orders, saying, 'I'm not going to risk it'." At this point Judge Fletcher quizzed Flake, "On Risk. What was the threat, if there even was a threat, that if Engel serf-represented, that he would ask further questions, be disruptive or would continue to be a 'threat' or a problem?" Flake responded, "Judge Navarro's observation that he 'will not follow my orders. Engel was proud of his effort to slide something by me'." Judge Fletcher said, "there are not facts to support this case. Were there any more Love type questions that were lurking?" Flake told the judge, "I don't know about any future questions." Flethcer said with emphasis, "the reason I am focusing on this is because your are basing it on RISK, so what's the Risk?" Flake continued to parrot that Judge Navarro was emphatic that Engel would not obey her orders, and then he revealed the fact that Navarro did not want to have to declare a Mistrial, stating, "the Risk is the Mistrial!" Fletcher continued, "Risk of not obeying orders? Risk of [Navarro] declaring a mistrial? I am having trouble with the risk of asking more questions that might result in a mistrial, can you help me on that?" Judge Watford stepped in by saying, "what specifically happened, or what was said, that would have resulted in a mistrial?" Flake responded, "it was WHAT the defense wanted to talk about, and the Judges response. Navarro said, 'no, you cannot bring up Loves IOG'." Judge Watford continued, "how is anyone to know if they ask one improper question it's game over?" Flake gave reference to Illinois v Allen. Watford called Flake on the fact that this was not quite the same situation saying, "if Engel were a BAR Attorney and this happened the Judge would not be happy. The Judge may say, 'we are going to have a Contempt Hearing on this'. It would be very unusual for a Judge in this situation say, 'you are off this case; there is another lawyer who can do this, but you're gone'! It appears to be quite a severe sanction to do this to a lay person saying, 'I'm denying you your Constitutional Right to represent yourself when there's been no prior bad question without warning." Flake, "Judge Navarro felt it was necessary so Engel wouldn't subvert the trial. It was quite obvious at this point that the Prosecution had made Todd's case so, Markowitz concluded with several minutes left on the clock. I have produced a video of the online proceedings if you'd like to watch. It includes a precursor by Eric and Andrea Parker and the United States Nevada Department of Justice Hearing to have Judge Gloria Navarro's Judgement of case dismissed with prejudice overturned. The Engel Case takes up the remainder.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated Todd Engel's Conviction! Judge Bybee wrote the Decision stating, "A jury convicted Appellant Todd Engel of obstruction of
justice and interstate travel in aid of extortion. He contends
that the district court violated the Sixth Amendment during
his trial when the court terminated his right to represent
himself and appointed standby counsel to represent him
instead. We hold that Engel’s conduct was not sufficiently
disruptive to justify termination of his right to selfrepresentation. Because this is a structural error, we vacate
Engel’s conviction and remand for a new trial." Todd's Attorney, Warren Markowitz is eagerly awaiting his release from Prison, where he will be a free man once again in Nevada and may return to his home state of Idaho.
Update - September 9, 2020 Warren Markowitz gives an update on Todd's Release.
BREAKING - September 15, 2020 Todd Engel embraced by family and friends as he was FINALLY released from prison (Lompoc) about an hour ago! Welcome Home Todd!😁
