Bundy to sue judge, Reid and others claiming constitutional rights violated

In a rambling and rather disjointed lawsuit that reportedly will be filed today, Cliven Bundy claims his constitutional rights are being violated by the judge in his criminal case, Gloria Navarro, as well as Sen. Harry Reid, his son Rory Reid and President Barack Obama.

Cliven Bundy (R-J photo)

Bundy and 18 others face charges over the 2014 armed standoff with BLM agents who attempted to confiscate his cattle, which he had been grazing on public land without permits since 1993. He and his co-defendants are jailed without bail on charges that include obstruction of justice, conspiracy, extortion, assault and impeding federal officers.

The suit asks for dismissal of the indictment, $50 million in damages, seeks to have Bundy freed from solitary confinement and alleges violations of his Sixth Amendment right by denying him right of counsel and right to speedy trial; his Eighth Amendment right to not face cruel or unusual punishment since he would be jailed for a year without conviction; his First Amendment right to freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom to peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances; and his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

Much of the suit is devoted to objections that the judge has refused to allow out of state attorney Larry Klayman to represent Bundy. It accuses the judge of doing the bidding of Reid, who nominated her, and Obama, who appointed her. It even accused of her of racial bias as a Latina.

The facts section of the suit begins with the accusation against Reid:

On or about March 24, 2014 for a period of days leading into April 2016, Defendant HARRY REID’S hand-picked Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 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.

It notes that Reid owns 93 acres of land next to Bundy’s ranch and claims, “He thus coveted his neighbor’s property and chattels.”

It accuses the Reids and Obama of making defamatory statements about Bundy and claims the Reids wanted to acquire the land so it could be sold to a “communist Chinese” company — an apparent reference to rumors about a Chinese solar panel maker seeking build a plant in Clark County.

An Obama joke at a dinner in 2014 about Bundy using the word “negro” is also quoted, though the date is mistakenly listed as 2016.

It also claims:

Following the arrest and indictment of Plaintiff BUNDY, in order to telegraph to and instruct Defendant Navarro his desire not to see Bundy released from solitary confinement in prison, convicted and otherwise bankrupted and otherwise harmed such that Defendants HARRY and RORY REID could obtain and sell the Bundy’s land for their own profit or kickbacks, as both are highly corrupt, Defendant HARRY REID had publicly published in the Las Vegas Review Journal and other media as a means to communicate and instruct Defendant NAVARRO on how to proceed against Defendant BUNDY and to poison any jury pool at trial.

This is followed by a copy of an entire R-J news story in which Sen. Reid accuses 70-year-old Bundy of domestic terrorism. The also quotes Bundy’s attorney Joel Hansen as asking: “Is Harry Reid the judge in this case or is he trying to improperly influence and poison the jury pool so that they will follow his opinion when they get to the jury box?”

A copy of the suit is posted on Klayman’s website.





5 comments on “Bundy to sue judge, Reid and others claiming constitutional rights violated

  1. Steve says:

    When the Bundy’s were defending their own lands and their own grazing rights, they had a valid point and received sympathy locally and nationally.
    When the Bundy’s went to Oregon, against all the wishes of the locals, they lost any credibility they had.

  2. Winston Smith says:

    Steve, from what Finicum’s widow told me, the locals were split on their views of the situation, but the press only told one side of the story.

  3. Steve says:

    Not press, I have friends in the region.
    As usual there will be a split on things like this but the main people involved did not want any “help” from the Bundy’s.

  4. Debra says:

    Steve, do you know why they went to Oregon? Do you know why the Hammond family insisted they did not want help? Kind of like Seth Rich’s family do not want any “help” or investigation. Read up

  5. Steve says:

    The Hammonds acted with malicious intent. Even going so far as killing “the king’s deer”
    Seven animals were then burned to hide evidence.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s