Haaland creates task force on Interior law enforcement after incidents draw scrutiny

Interior Secretary Deb Haaland is creating a task force aimed at increasing trust in the Interior Department's law enforcement agencies following incidents involving the National Park Service (NPS) law enforcement that have come under public scrutiny. 

In a new memo issued Wednesday, Haaland said she would create a task force seeking to improve law enforcement programs through the NPS, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

Specifically, the task force will focus on strengthening trust in law enforcement programs, making sure appropriate policies and oversight are implemented and making sure resources are available for officer mental health, wellness and safety. 

...The group will be led by the department’s Office of Law Enforcement and Security as well as a representative from each bureau and experts from the Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Civil Rights and the Office of Human Capital.

...Haaland’s memo references a controversial incident in which U.S. Park Police and other law enforcement officers cleared Black Lives Matter protesters from the Lafayette Square area in front of the White House last year. 

The watchdog report found last month that in last year’s incident officers didn’t fully warn the crowd to disperse and said that fractured radio communications led officers to use chemical irritants that had not been authorized.

READ ENTIRE POST

Another publication provides additional background:

...The task force will use what Haaland calls an “equity lens” and “evidence-based decision making,” to look for ways to improve the agency’s law enforcement program and build trust with minority communities.

The protests in Lafayette Park were sparked by the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis and were part of nationwide rioting and looting, but the D.C. protest was aimed largely at President Donald Trump during an election year, and police used flash bangs, tear gas, and shields to safely clear the Black Lives Matter protesters from the area.

Black Lives Matter sued the Trump Administration, but last month a federal judge ruled Black Lives Matter can’t claim damages over the removal of their protesters from Lafayette Square.

U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich dismissed claims that Trump, former Attorney General Bill Barr, and former Defense Secretary Mark Esper had coordinated a conspiracy directed at black protesters.

“Merely alleging that the defendant officials communicated, without alleging any details of those communications that suggest an unlawful agreement, cannot justify inferring the requisite agreement” Friedrich wrote.

Now, the Interior Department will take its own shot at the Trump Administration over the clearing of the Lafayette Park riot, which Trump opponents say was done so that Trump could walk to a nearby church for a media appearance.

Haaland is exactly right in creating the task force. She is very wrong, though, in limiting its scope to this one event. She also errs in making strictly inhouse appointments to the task force.

The entire Interior law enforcement program needs an intense review and much reform. Remember Dan Love and Burning Man? Remember BLM Special Agent Larry C. Wooten's memo in the Bundy case? Remember the vast withholding of evidence? All worthy of consideration by the task force.

Keeping the review Interior employees only means the recommendations will be 1) better training 2) additional personnel, and 3) increased budgets.

DuBois column: Bundy Boondoggle

 

The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the mistrial in the Bundy case 

Bundy Boondoggle 

The saga of Cliven Bundy and his battles with the feds over livestock grazing go back many years. From a strictly administrative/legal basis, here is a quick summary: 

° In 1993, BLM sent Bundy a notice of trespass and an order to remove his cattle

° In 1998 a federal district court permanently enjoined Bundy from grazing livestock within the    Bunkerville allotment. Bundy filed an appeal and in 1999 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied his appeal and affirmed the lower court’s order.

° In 2011, BLM sent Bundy a notice of intent to roundup his cattle.

° In 2013 a federal district court ordered Bundy to remove his cattle within 45 days and authorized the feds to impound any cattle that were not removed. Bundy appealed and lost.

° In March of 2014, BLM issued a notice of intent to impound Bundy’s cattle, and on April 5, 2014 the roundup began. 

This was a large operation for the feds, as the court recently summarized: 

BLM made extensive preparations for “Operation Gold Butte Impound.” Coordinating with agents from the National Park Service and Federal Bureau of Investigation, BLM anticipated resistance from Bundy and his supporters. It planned to escort the contractors in and out of the area each day. BLM established a Listening Post/Observation Post (LP/OP) “strategically placed at elevated positions around the Bundy residence each evening” where agents were outfitted with binoculars, spotting scopes, night-vision goggles, and thermal-imaging devices. The LP/OP personnel were to have “agency-issued rifles with them at all times.” BLM also established a Tactical Operations Center (TOC), Forward Operating Base (FOB), a media site, and a “free speech area.”

I and many others have written about what transpired during the so-called standoff and there is no need to repeat it here, as our interest today is in the court case. Suffice it to say the feds backed down and left, handing a major victory to Bundy and his supporters. I vividly remember both the surprise and joy I personally experienced at this outcome. 

However, in March of 2016 a federal grand jury indicted nineteen individuals, including Cliven Bundy and his two sons, Ammon and Ryan, for a slate of federal crimes, including impeding federal officers, threatening federal officers, and extortion, as well as conspiracy to commit those crimes. Trial began on October 30, 2017, and that is when the government’s transgressions and abuses started coming to light. 

During the trial a bombshell memo from a BLM law enforcement officer to the Dept. of Justice was made public. In the memo, BLM Special Agent Larry C. Wooten stated, “I routinely observed, and the investigation revealed a widespread pattern of bad judgement, lack of discipline, incredible bias, unprofessionalism and misconduct, as well as likely policy, ethical and legal violations among senior and supervisory staff at the BLM’s Office of Law Enforcement and Security.” 

Wooten further stated these issues, “…made a mockery of our position of special trust and confidence, portrayed extreme unprofessional bias, adversely affected our agency’s mission and likely the trial regarding Cliven Bundy…” and “put our agency and specific law enforcement supervisors in potential legal, civil and administrative jeopardy.” 

Some of the actions taken by certain BLM officers are simply too crude to include in this publication. However, Wooten did report: 

º Conduct that was, “discriminatory, harassing and showed clear prejudice against the defendants, their supporters and Mormons.”

º Uncovered comments where BLM agents “bragged about roughing up Dave Bundy” and “grinding his face into the ground.”

º That BLM employees, “didn’t properly turn in the required discovery material (likely exculpatory evidence)”

º That one BLM Supervisor, “instigated the unprofessional monitoring of jail calls between defendants and their wives, without prosecutor or FBI consent.”

º That former BLM Special Agent-In-Charge Dan Love purposely ignored federal and state recommendations, “in order to command the most intrusive, oppressive, large scale and militaristic trespass cattle impound possible.” 

BLM Agent Wooten also say his investigation found, “excessive use of force, civil rights and policy violations.” Further, Wooten says, “there was an improper cover-up in virtually every matter that a particular BLM SAC participated in, or oversaw.”  

It also became apparent that important evidence had been withheld by the feds. The presiding judge held a series of hearings in November of 2017. Based upon those hearings the judge found the following pieces of evidence were withheld from the defense: 

° Records about surveillance at the Bundy ranch

° Records about the presence of government snipers

° FBI logs about activity at the ranch in the days leading up to the standoff

° Law enforcement assessments dating to 2012 that found the Bundys posed no threat, and

° Internal affairs reports about misconduct by BLM agents   

In total, it came to 3,300 pages of evidence withheld. As a result the judge said this represented “outrageous” abuses and “flagrant misconduct” by the prosecutors. The judge declared “a universal sense of justice has been violated” and dismissed all charges against the Bundys “with prejudice”, meaning those charges cannot be brought again.  

Unbelievably, President Trump’s Justice Department appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the most liberal circuit in the nation.    

On August 6 of this year the Ninth Circuit rendered their decision and I’m pleased to report the government’s CYA appeal was not successful. 

The court affirmed the prosecution was guilty of “flagrant misconduct”, with such a finding necessary for charges to be dismissed “with prejudice.” 

The court affirmed that the withholding of information about the surveillance camera “was willful rather than merely inadvertent.” The court also stated, “Rather than looking into the request and locating the documents before trial began, the government chose to fight rather than respond to the request.” 

On the withholding of evidence concerning the government’s use of snipers, the court stated: “Of particular concern is the government’s handling of evidence related to the presence of snipers. This was a hot-button issue… The government said the Bundys’ claim of “snipers” was “false” and “deceitful,” yet the government’s own documents referred to its agents as “snipers.”…”In short, the government had to know the import that any evidence regarding snipers, or agents who looked and functioned like snipers, would have in this case. Nevertheless, it withheld a slate of information…” The court also found the government’s position this evidence was irrelevant to be “preposterous and reckless.” 

With respect to the threat assessments, the court said, “…the government failed to turn over beneficial information speaking to Bundy’s potential for violence. These documents could have helped bolster the defense’s claim that the government had engaged in an overmilitarized impound operation that the Bundys claim fueled their fears of being surrounded by snipers. But irrespective of the theory defendants were to put forward, these documents should have been released. They, at the very least, provided impeachment evidence because some of their findings contrasted with the 2014 threat assessment used as the basis for planning the impound operation, and they undermined the prosecution’s opening statement.” 

There is more, but in all instances the appeals court affirmed the lower court’s decision. 

There are still many questions concerning the design, implementation and costs of this government boondoggle. Shamefully, neither political party has seen fit to conduct a complete investigation and report on this operation. That failure increases the odds that similar abuses will occur in the future.  

Until next time, be a nuisance to the devil and don’t forget to check that cinch.

Frank DuBois was the NM Secretary of Agriculture from 1988 to 2003, is the author of a blog: The Westerner (www.thewesterner.blogspot.com) and is the founder of The DuBois Rodeo Scholarship and The DuBois Western Heritage Foundation

This column originally appeared in the September issues of The New Mexico Stockman and The Livestock Market Digest. 

Now look at the post below: its only been a few months since federal troops were sent to various big cities, and we already have a GAO report on their activity. No such report has ever been requested concerning the Bundy Standoff. Any one of the 535 members of congress could make such a request, but they haven't. Careful scrutiny for social justice, nada for range justice. 

How the feds helped make Cliven Bundy a celebrity

Qn Jan. 8, 2018, the trial room on the seventh floor of the Las Vegas, Nevada, federal courthouse was packed with over a dozen reporters and at least five times as many spectators. At the front, facing the bench, was a 71-year-old rancher named Cliven Bundy. He didn’t look well; his ankles were shackled and his back hunched. Four teeth had recently been pulled. He had been on trial for eight weeks and imprisoned for nearly two years. In a bit of trial theater, he was wearing blue jail-issued clothes with “detainee” stamped on the back. Nearby sat two of his sons, Ryan and Ammon, as well as another ally, a self-styled militiaman named Ryan Payne...On the face of it, the case was the federal government’s to lose. Bundy’s supporters had pointed loaded weapons at federal agents, and the rancher owed the American people more than $1 million in unpaid grazing fees. The Bundys’ argument hinged in part on their belief that the federal government cannot legally own land — a fringe interpretation of the U.S. Constitution unlikely to stand up in court against a century of case law. The verdict promised a final reckoning for the Bundys, the BLM and Western public lands U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro took her seat overlooking the room. “The court finds that a universal sense of justice has been violated,” she said flatly into her microphone. But she wasn’t talking to the Bundys; her disappointment was directed at the U.S. attorneys, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and, by extension, the BLM. She was dismissing the case, with prejudice, meaning that it could not be brought again and would provide no answer to the question of whether or not the Bundys had broken the law. Instead, there remained only lingering questions: How did it come to be that, at 10:50 a.m., Cliven Bundy strode out of the courthouse, unhunched, unshackled, in a gray blazer, blue jeans and white cowboy hat — a free man? And what role did the government play in creating an anti-public-lands hero, through its own bungled attempts to take him down?...MORE

While I could quibble about a few things, overall this is an excellent piece and should be read by those interested in the Bundy case and related issues.

It would have been helpful to the reader if links had been provided to the documents and Facebook pages referred to.

Here are some of the links:

The Ian Bartrum paper is Searching for Cliven Bundy: The Constitution and Public Lands

The 2002 IG Report is Disquieting State of Disorder: An Assessment of Department of the Interior Law Enforcement

The two Dan Love IG reports can be found here

The Wooten Memo is here.

Bundy Case - Second Wooten memo kept under seal?

Nextrush Free reports

A court document filed this week by a defense lawyer in Las Vegas gives some details about the emergence of a new memo in the Bunkerville Standoff case from Bureau of Land Management agent Larry Wooten. The US Attorney's Office in Las Vegas and the Justice Department in Washington both received the memo on March 9th. On March 21st defense lawyers received a motion from federal prosecutors to file under seal the new memo detailing allegations of improper conduct by federal law enforcement etc. in the Bunkerville case. Its appears that the feds want to keep the contents of Wooten's new memo secret with Wooten expanding and detailing his original allegations...

In an earlier post Nextrush Free linked to a 3/24 Facebook post by Ammon Bundy

Well, we have whistleblower memo #2 that has been sent to the DOJ, the prosecution and the defense attorneys, and it is currently under seal. Our question is always the same: Why hide the truth? Its so easy to tell so just tell it and let the public decide who is in the wrong. The memo reveals that there are agents now willing to testify to even more egregious government misconduct in this case of The United States of America VS Cliven Bundy Et Al. Let them speak and let the truth be told!

And here is a snapshot of an Ammon Bundy Facebook post on 3/26 

I wrote about the first Wooten memo here.
I haven't seen anything in the MSM about a second Wooten memo.

Cliven Bundy-FBI debacle: Another example of why the feds need to be leashed

In USA Today James Bovard basically makes the same points I did with reference to prosecutorial misconduct and the Wooten memo, although in a much more articulate fashion. He then provides examples of similar federal abuses in the Randy Weaver case and at Waco, and concludes with the following:

In the Bundy case, Judge Navarro slammed the FBI for withholding key evidence.  Unfortunately, this seems to be standard procedure for the FBI — including in their investigations of both the Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton presidential campaigns as well as the Las Vegas shooter who slaughtered concert goers last October. FBI officials have also been caught routinely twisting the truth to burnish prosecutions. False FBI trial testimony may have helped sentence 32 innocent people to death, as the Washington Post reported in 2015. How many other innocent people have been put behind bars because of federal misconduct? Attorney General Jeff Sessions is ordering a formal investigation into how the Justice Department went awry in Nevada. Until the feds cease wrongfully abusing their targets, there will be no rebound in trust in Washington. If the Trump administration cannot rein in renegade federal prosecutors, the president should cease-and-desist any and all claptrap about “draining the swamp.”

I would add that Sessions is sending an expert in discovery to review the case, while Larry Klayman has written to Sessions asking for investigations by the Inspector General and DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility.

DuBois column

A mistrial, a Heinrich maneuver, and a monument misstep

Bundy Mistrial

Chief United States District Judge for Nevada, Gloria Maria Navarro, has declared a mistrial in the charges against the Bundy family and one accomplice. What started as a simple case of failure to pay grazing fees has, thanks to the disturbing actions by the feds, turned into a national showcase of federal abuse of power.

Chief Judge Navarro found that in six different instances the federal prosecutor had failed to turn over exculpatory evidence to the defense, which is required under the so-called Brady rule. How much was not turned over? Oh, just 3,300 pages.

Initially, prosecutors said there was no surveillance of the Bundy family prior to the raid on their cattle. They lied. Then prosecutors said the cameras just provided a live feed.  They lied about that too. The prosecutors originally claimed there were no federal snipers. Again, they were found to be lying.

The prosecutors fought to keep the Bundys in jail because they were a threat to society. Some of the documents they failed to disclose were FBI threat assessments of the Bundy’s which found just the opposite. Imagine being kept in federal confinement for two years under false pretenses.

And just prior to Judge Navarro declaring a mistrial, a bombshell memo from a BLM law enforcement officer to the Dept. of Justice was made public. In the memo, BLM Special Agent Larry C. Wooten stated, “I routinely observed, and the investigation revealed a widespread pattern of bad judgement, lack of discipline, incredible bias, unprofessionalism and misconduct, as well as likely policy, ethical and legal violations among senior and supervisory staff at the BLM’s Office of Law Enforcement and Security.”

Wooten further stated these issues, “…made a mockery of our position of special trust and confidence, portrayed extreme unprofessional bias, adversely affected our agency’s mission and likely the trial regarding Cliven Bundy…” and “put our agency and specific law enforcement supervisors in potential legal, civil and administrative jeopardy.”

Some of the actions taken by certain BLM officers are simply too crude to include in this publication. However, Wooten did report:

º Conduct that was, “discriminatory, harassing and showed clear prejudice against the defendants, their supporters and Mormons.”

º Uncovered comments where BLM agents “bragged about roughing up Dave Bundy” and “grinding his face into the ground.”

º That BLM employees, “didn’t properly turn in the required discovery material (likely exculpatory evidence)”

º That one BLM Supervisor, “instigated the unprofessional monitoring of jail calls between defendants and their wives, without prosecutor or FBI consent.”

º That former BLM Special Agent-In-Charge Dan Love purposely ignored federal and state recommendations, “in order to command the most intrusive, oppressive, large scale and militaristic trespass cattle impound possible.”

BLM Agent Wooten also say his investigation found, “excessive use of force, civil rights and policy violations.” Further, Wooten says, “there was an improper cover-up in virtually every matter that a particular BLM SAC participated in, or oversaw.” 

This has turned into a textbook case of federal abuse and incompetence, all because a federal land management agency refuses to allow themselves to be treated like other landowners within a state. In New Mexico and most other western states, the landowner reports that estrays are trespassing on their property and the appropriate state agency takes steps to remove the trespassing livestock.  Usually a clean and efficient operation conducted by state employees under state law. That procedure, though, can’t be used to justify larger federal budgets, additional employees or an increase in the federal arsenal, so the feds refuse to utilize this tried and true method.

I’m reminded that in his opening statement to the jury, the Acting U.S. Attorney said this case was not just about grazing fees, it was really about upholding the rule of law. Five weeks or so later, the case is still about the rule of law, only now it is the feds who are the accused transgressors.

By the time you read this, we should know whether Navarro declares it a mistrial with prejudice, or without prejudice. If she dismisses it with prejudice, the defendants cannot be brought up on those charges again. Let’s hope the rule of law prevails.

Another Heinrich Maneuver

As one of its last items of business this year, the U.S. Senate passed S.432, the Cerros Del Norte Conservation Act, which would establish two wilderness areas within the Rio Grande del Norte National Monument. It may have been the last order of business of the Senate but it was one of the first orders of business of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, which passed the bill on May 3. Weirdly, the Committee didn’t invite the views of the Trump administration, and instead inserted the testimony of an Obama administration official which had been given two years prior.

This seems to fit in with the typical legislative methods employed by Senators Udall and Heinrich. Remember the Sabinoso Wilderness? That was the wilderness pushed by Udall that had no public access. It only passed because it was part of an Omnibus bill. Then they brought us the Columbine-Hondo Wilderness and transferred the Valles Caldera as part of a national defense bill. The action on this new wilderness bill shouldn’t surprise us.

Monument Misstep

In a recent interview, Interior Secretary Zinke shared some interesting information concerning the monument review and the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument.  “The president tasked me to get the local voice,” Zinke said, and, “Overwhelmingly, the communities were comfortable with the monuments.”

That tells us the millions of dollars the environmental foundations spent in funding the NM Wilderness Alliance, the Friends of the Organs, the green chamber of commerce, etc., and their multi-year spending on television ads, newspaper ads, radio spots and other marketing venues, was money well spent. I mean, it fooled Zinke, now didn’t it.

Until next time, be a nuisance to the devil and don’t forget to check that cinch.

Frank DuBois was the NM Secretary of Agriculture from 1988 to 2003, is the author of a blog: The Westerner (www.thewesterner.blogspot.com) and is the founder of The DuBois Rodeo Scholarship and The DuBois Western Heritage Foundation

 This column originally appeared in the January issue of the New Mexico Stockman and the January issue of the Livestock Market Digest. 

Lawmakers Seek Investigation After Whistleblower Exposes Federal Thugs

...A second memo cited by Representative Shea was written by a BLM assistant special-agent-in-charge about Wooten's allegations. In that memo, it was revealed that Wooten had outlined a series of “critical vulnerabilities” in the BLM's case against the Bundy family, a family that was terrorized by the agency for allegedly not paying grazing fees allegedly due to the feds (the Bundy family denies wrongdoing and insists they have always complied with the law). The first vulnerability identified was that the BLM was “heavy handed” and “cruel,” with Shea pointing to the BLM's killing of cattle, killing of bulls in an effort to destroy herd, the establishment of a “First Amendment zone” for protesters, the tazering of older ladies, the harassing of the public on a public right of way, and more. The second critical vulnerability was that BLM lacked legitimate law-enforcement authority in the case. Indeed, more than a few legal experts and scholars have questioned the legitimacy and constitutionality of the entire agency, as well as its dubious claims to reign supreme over vast areas of American land. Vulnerability number three, “probably the one that should live for all time,” as Shea put it, is that BLM is a “poor manager of resources” such as grazing areas, the memo said. “We all knew that already, but to have this admission that BLM can't even perform the mission for which it was formed is really important,” Shea said, emphasizing the constitutional and pragmatic concerns surrounding an agency that has been plagued by controversy and scandal for years. “I can sum this all up in a few principles,” Shea continued. “No one is above law. Bureaucrats are servants of people, not other way around. And third, we are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. Fourth, a sniper rifle is not due process. This continued aggression is not just breach of trust with American people, but it's BLM trying to establish itself as a law-enforcement agency, which is not all right.”...more

Ammon Bundy: Not surprised prosecutors under fire in Nevada standoff case

The 42-year-old has been staying at a relative's home in Las Vegas, supervised with GPS monitoring and a curfew, after spending a year and 10 months in custody following his arrest in Oregon. Outside the downtown courthouse, wearing a cowboy hat, brown plaid shirt and a black Carhartt vest, he said he was buoyed by a new memo from a U.S. Bureau of Land Management whistleblower that alleged misdeeds by federal agents during the investigation of the 2014 armed standoff outside his father's ranch near Bunkerville. Agent Larry Wooten sent the Nov. 27 memo to the U.S. Department of Justice, citing serious concerns about the "heavy-handedness" of Dan Love, the BLM agent who led the round-up Cliven Bundy's cattle after the family patriarch failed to pay grazing fees and fines for two decades. Wooten alleged Love and other agency supervisors withheld evidence, abused their power and actively ridiculed the Bundys, though Wooten also said Cliven Bundy and his supporters "chose an illegal, uncivilized and dangerous strategy" to express their grievances."We've been locked away for the last two years with discovery that's been sealed. We've done our due diligence going through every file, trying to understand every video, trying to understand every body cam, every dash cam,'' Bundy said. "We have understood that this has been going on, but we haven't been able to tell the public. So the fact that it has come out doesn't surprise us at all.''...more

Here is the video:

https://youtu.be/dJbYaqEPkEM

Media coverage of Wooten Memo alleging vast misconduct by feds in the bundy case

Here is more media coverage and analysis of the Wooten memo which I posted yesterday.

Redoubt News EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Matt Shea Exposes BLM Atrocities 

Oregonian  BLM investigator alleges misconduct by feds in Bundy ranch standoff 

High Country News  Former BLM investigator alleges vast misconduct in Bundy case

AP  Investigator alleges misconduct in armed Nevada standoff

BLM agent files complaint with DOJ alleging "policy, ethical and legal violations" in Cliven Bundy trespass case

Embedded below is a complaint filed by Special Agent Larry C. Wooten. Wooten summarizes the issues right up front in his memo:

There is no date on the memo and I have no way of independently verifying it. However, Wa. State Rep. Matt Shae has gone public with the memo on Redoubt News. If real and accurate, this is dynamite. Things were even worse than I had imagined. It indicts both Interior law enforcement employees and the U.S. Attorney's office.

You can view the Redoubt News video with Rep. Matt Shae here (Facebook) or here (website).

Here is the Wooten memo:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ewb9cit4oy6dx6x/Wooten%20Communication_77PI.pdf?dl=0