Attorney Marcus Mumford Leaves Humanity But Never Allowed Ammon Bundy To Tell His Tale In The Trafficking Of Tiny Humans Network

Ammon Bundy has a tale that has never been told, possibly for the simple fact that he did not know who to tell it to.

Ammon knows what was going on with children in foster care.

Ammon alludes to a possible border babies child trafficking network and the nasty things people in foster care do.

Larry Klayman may know what Ammon is trying to tell.

Bundy Ranch Peter Santilli Files DC Attorney Grievance Against Judicial Watch Larry Klayman For Fraud

Final defendant sentenced in Bundy ranch standoff in Nevada

LaVoy Finicum has an untold history as a professional foster parent, his source of income, who was known for doing nasty things to tiny humans in foster care.

Ammon Bundy leaves militia movement after ripping Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric

Ryan may also have a tale to tell.

Ryan Bundy, figure in rancher standoff with feds, running for Nevada governor

Koch industries had a substantial interest in the land of the Bundy Ranch, but not the Bundys.

There is a need to focus on the attorneys involved in the Bundy Ranch.

There is also a need to re-examine Joe Arpio, as there are rumors that the Maricopa County Sheriff is involved in the network of trafficking tiny border babies to do nasty things.

Joe Arpaio's Pal Ammon Bundy Leads Takeover of Federal Building in Oregon

Joe Arpaio’s prison was a circus of cruelty. Now his values are spreading

Trump, with advice from Roger Stone, pardoned Ammon and Joe Arpio.

Joe Arpaio has a very interesting history in relation to international trafficking tiny humans which seems to originate with the attorneys.

https://beverlytran.blogspot.com/search?q=joe+arpaio

Ammon Bundy's lawyer quotes from Western film, mocks federal prosecutors in last-minute legal motion

Marcus Mumford made a mockery in his representation of Ammon, but the question is not why, but, what trafficking tiny humans activities was he covering up.

Marcus Mumford, attorney who represented Ammon Bundy in federal court in Oregon, found dead in Utah home

Marcus Mumford

Marcus R. Mumford, the Utah attorney who successfully represented Ammon Bundy in federal court in Portland, was found dead in his home Monday morning.

A colleague and friend who had stopped by Mumford’s home in Salt Lake City to bring him breakfast and discuss a case found Mumford, said Mumford’s sister-in-law, Katie Mumford.

Mumford, 46, lived alone. Family members don’t know what caused his death.

He was a divorced father of seven children ranging in age from 5 to 17. His ex-wife and children lived nearby in Salt Lake City, Katie Mumford told The Oregonian/OregonLive.

He wasn’t ill with the coronavirus, and there were no signs of foul play, according to relatives. They’re awaiting the results of an autopsy. His father and mother both suffered serious ailments at a young age; his father had a heart attack around age 40, according to Katie Mumford.

Marcus Mumford represented Bundy when he was acquitted on all charges stemming from the armed takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in January 2016.

Mumford was tackled and stunned with a Taser by federal marshals moments after the acquittal. He had shouted at the judge, argued for Bundy’s release and demanded to see a detention order from Nevada following the October 2016 announcement of not guilty verdicts for Bundy and six co-defendants.

Mumford later agreed to voluntarily give up his standing to practice in federal court in Oregon, putting an end to U.S. District Judge Michael W. Mosman’s attempt to officially ban him in Oregon’s federal district.

Mosman pursued the sanction against Mumford, citing repeated instances of Mumford’s arguing with U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown during the refuge occupation trial, inappropriate commentary on a witness in the presence of a jury and failures or refusals to observe court rulings. Mumford previously told The Oregonian/OregonLive that Mosman was being “vindictive.”

At the time, another defense attorney in the refuge occupation trial praised Mumford. Defense lawyer Matthew Schindler, who was defendant Kenneth Medenbach’s standby lawyer during the trial, said Mumford represented Bundy zealously and successfully.

“What we need far more of in our legal community are Marcus Mumfords,” Schindler told The Oregonian/OregonLive then. “We have plenty of people who are polite. We need people who give everything they have to give.''

Inviting wrath of judge may be part of a calculated approach by Ammon Bundy's lawyer

Attorney Marcus Mumford told The Oregonian/OregonLive that he's striving to show a link between what he and Bundy perceive as the government's "misconduct'' in the shooting of Robert "LaVoy" Finicum with what they contend is the government's mishandling and mischaracterization of the refuge occupation.

Angie Bundy, wife of Ammon Bundy’s brother and co-defendant Ryan Bundy, wrote on Mumford’s Facebook page Monday:

"Marcus Mumford was fearless in defending Ammon and the other men in the trial in Portland. He also became a friend to the family and he will be greatly missed. He was the one who felt that the case could be won, and helped make it happen. Our hearts are broken, Rest in Peace.''

Mumford grew up on an Idaho dairy farm and told students at his alma mater, Utah State University, in 2010 that he had to be “audacious enough” to enter the field of law with a significant stuttering condition that he had struggled with since age 4 because “the world wasn’t prepared for a stuttering lawyer.”

Mumford went on to graduate from Brigham Young University’s law school. He clerked for a federal appellate judge and worked eight years for one of the country’s biggest law firms, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, before returning to Utah to open his own practice.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

The Study Of Fake News: Another loss for Larry Klayman, esq. This time for Sheriff Joe Arpaio against the New York Times

Introducing Checkmatek2.net, the study of fake news.

Some call it propaganda.

I call it crap because it is all funded through child welfare fraud.

This is not a blog for "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending).

Grampa Corsi is supposed to come before the U.S. House Judiciary Committee to explain his propaganda, fake news, crap.

Larry Klayman, the "Legal Genius" (trademark pending) is the brain behind the creation of Judicial Watch, another foreign propaganda, fake news, crap organization.

U.S. District Court
District of Columbia (Washington, DC)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:18-cv-02387-APM

L to R: “Dr.” Jerome Corsi (client) and Larry Klayman, esq.

https://checkmatek2.net/2019/08/14/another-loss-for-larry-klayman-esq-this-time-for-sheriff-joe-arpaio-against-the-new-york-times/

Do you see how that works?

U.S. House Judiciary Chairm... by on Scribd

U.S. House Judiciary Letter Attachment toJerome Corsi Document Request 3419 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Arizona CPS Targets The Poors Of Maricopa

The only item that shocked me in this editorial is that Maricopa County has a Child Protective Services issue of concentrated removals from "Targeted Populations" identified through zip codes.

It is just such a shame that there is no data for child trafficking in the area because I bet there will be a strong Pearson's R is going to pop up.

But then again, Perkins Coie sucks, which is where there are so many removals because poverty is the crime of child abuse and neglect.

Arizona Computer Glitches Bust Child Human Trafficking & Fraud

Gotta Pay The Bills: How Arizona Legally Kidnaps Children Of The Poors

Guardianship Firm and its Principals Charged with Federal Conspiracy, Fraud, Theft and Money Laundering Offenses

Perkins Coie & Children's Rights Covered Up And Profited From Trafficking Tiny Humans In Arizona Child Welfare

Valdez: DCS removes the most kids from high poverty ZIP codes. That's no coincidence

Why poverty often looks like neglect

If Arizona wants to keep children out of the child welfare system, it should make alleviating poverty a public policy priority.

The evidence is in the areas of Maricopa County with the highest number of children being removed from their homes.

880 kids removed from just 5 areas

The Arizona Department of Child Safety identified the five Maricopa County ZIP codes that had the most children removed for child abuse and neglect in 2017. All of those areas have high rates of poverty, low wages and a lack of affordable housing.

They also have high numbers of people on public health insurance, a program Arizona lawmakers want to shrink.

In 2017, there were:

• 238 children removed from homes in ZIP code 85301 in Glendale. 
• 165 children removed from homes in ZIP code 85015 near Alhambra.
• 160 children removed from homes in ZIP code 85009 in Maryvale/Estrella/South Mountain.
• 159 children removed from homes in ZIP code 85008 near Sky Harbor International Airport.
• 158 children removed from homes in ZIP code 85201 in west Mesa.

The poverty rates in these ZIP code areas range from 31 percent to 54 percent, according to Census data from the American Community Survey, which uses “zip code tabulation areas” that roughly correspond with these ZIP codes.

Compare that to the state’s overall poverty rate of 17.7 percent.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Leads Members Of Congress In Filing Amicus Brief Opposing Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Motion To Vacate His Conviction Following Trump's Pardon

Washington, D.C. - Today, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY ), Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security Ranking Member Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Ranking Member Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice Ranking Member Steve Cohen (D-TN), Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Ranking Member David Cicilline (D-RI), Representative Jackie Speier (D-CA), and other Members of Congress, filed an amicus brief opposing Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s motion to vacate his conviction for criminal contempt of court on the ground that President Donald Trump’s pardon of Sheriff Arpaio was unconstitutional.

In 2011, a Federal court found that Sheriff Arpaio's police department routinely engaged in racial profiling of Latinos.  The court ordered the department to cease its unconstitutional practices immediately, but Sheriff Arpaio and the department flouted the court's order, and continued to direct their staff to deprive thousands of people of their constitutional rights.  This past July, Sheriff Arpaio was held in criminal contempt of court for repeatedly and blatantly ignoring the court’s injunction against him.  Just three weeks later, however, President Trump pardoned his contempt conviction.

The Members released the following statement:

“The President's pardon of Sheriff Arpaio was not just disgraceful, but also represented what we believe to be an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers.  As our brief argues, it is essential to the independence of the judiciary that courts be able to enforce compliance with their orders through the contempt power, especially those orders that protect the constitutional rights of private parties.  By pardoning Sheriff Arpaio, the President threatened this fundamental judicial power.  Furthermore, if the President’s pardon is allowed to stand, this case could have severe implications for Congress’s ability to compel compliance with its own investigations and orders.

“President Trump’s pardon was not intended to remedy an unduly harsh criminal punishment, or to correct a mistake in the enforcement of the criminal law—the intended purpose of the power—but to usurp the power of the judiciary to vindicate the authority of the courts and to uphold the rule of law.  Despite common misconceptions, the pardon power is not absolute.  As Laurence Tribe, one of the nation’s leading constitutional scholars, explained, ‘when the Constitution says that the president ‘shall have power,’ that does not mean unlimited power.  It means power that is not inconsistent with other parts of the Constitution.’  In this case, the pardon power was used to upset the careful balance of power among the branches of government, and to undermine the rule of law.

“We agree with Professor Tribe and with numerous other scholars and commentators that the President’s pardon of Sheriff Arpaio was unconstitutional and, therefore, ask the court to deny Sheriff Arpaio’s motion to vacate his conviction.”

U.S. House Judiciary Democrats Proposed Memorandum of Amici Curiae In Opposition To Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Mo... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & House Judiciary Dems Urge Goodlatte To Take Up Trump's Pardon Of Sheriff Joe Arpaio

Committee Dems Send 5^th Request to Chairman for Oversight of Trump Administration

Washington, D.C. – Today, all House Judiciary Committee Democrats, led by Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Immigration Subcommittee Ranking Member Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), wrote to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (D-VA) to ask that he investigate Trump’s pardon of controversial sheriff Joe Arpaio and related events.

The letter is below.

In July, Joe Arpaio was convicted of criminal contempt after years of racially profiling and arresting individuals based on their perceived immigration status. In today’s letter to Goodlatte, the members wrote, “Sheriff Arpaio was convicted for criminal contempt of court because he ignored orders from a federal judge to stop engaging in racial profiling.  The pardon not only disregards the rule of law, it directly flouts the courts themselves by signaling that it is acceptable for parties to ignore court orders.”

The letter notes that for “125 years, presidents have worked through the Pardon Attorney to ensure that the power of clemency is fairly applied.  President Trump chose to work around this mechanism and ignore DOJ policy calling for a waiting period of five years or more before considering a pardon application and the expression of regret or remorse by the applicant.” It further details that “before resorting to a full pardon, President Trump asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions to simply drop the criminal case against Sheriff Arpaio,” pointing out that the House Judiciary Committee  “has long defended the view that presidents should avoid involvement in specific criminal cases in order to avoid even the perception of politicizing the administration of justice.”

The Members continued, “It is also our Committee’s unique and pressing responsibility to conduct oversight of the President’s use of executive power—particularly when that power is expressed as a pardon that only serves to endorse the transgressions committed by the offender.  If we do not examine this use of the pardon power, we fear that the Committee will be seen by our constituents—and by future generations—as also having endorsed the Sheriff’s conduct.” 

Today’s letter was signed by every Democratic member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, which includes: Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Ted Deutch (D-FL), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), Karen Bass (D-CA), Cedric Richmond (D-LA), Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), David Cicilline (D-RI), Eric Swalwell (D-CA), Ted Lieu (D-CA), Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) and Brad Schneider (D-IL). 

Conyers & Judiciary Democrats Letter To Bob Goodlatte to Address Pardon of Joe Arpaio by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©