Jiggyfly
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2013
- Messages
- 9,220
THU SEP 10, 2015 AT 10:32 AM PDT
Oathkeepers vow to 'intercede' if U.S. Marshals try to take Kim Davis into custody again
byJen HaydenFollow
228 Comments / 228 New
If the U.S. Marshals are instructed to take Kim Davis into custody, these guys say they will 'intercede.'
The Oathkeepers organization are apparently trying to one-up the Westboro Baptist Church in the department of crazy attention-seeking. In a statement and recorded phone call featuring Oathkeeper's founder Stewart Rhodes, Jackson County (Kentucky) Sheriff Denny Peyman, Missouri Oathkeeper Jon Karriman and West Virginia Oathkeeper Allen Lardieri, the men outlined their plans to head to Kentucky to provide "round-the-clock" protection for Kim Davis to ensure Federal Marshals are not able to take her into custody again if U.S. District Judge David Bunning orders her to be held again on contempt of court charges. The group had previously planned to protest in front of Judge Bunning's home.
Parts of the conversation are transcribed here, the full recording of the call is available below. Emphasis added to highlight the more threatening passages of the conversation:
Rhodes: Sheriff, we were talking earlier and you were voicing your opinion. You think that the heat was coming down and so they are kind of backpedaling. Is that still how you...
Sheriff Peyman: Well, I think you know, everybody's gonna back off. I think it's still too, I think it's important we still have our presence there. Um, just like you say, with an offer of protection. Um, talking with her attorney, let them know, they know we are available now because I heard the conversation with the, uh, secretary, the secretary of the attorney. I still think it's important that our presence be know there because it's not an issue of marriage, it's not an issue of the things they are trying to make the issue. The issue is still that a judge gave an elected official, a citizen of the United States, detained them without cause. Without paperwork, without due process. And I think while everybody else is painting the picture, I think the true picture is just what I said I said about the judge and I still feel he needs to know that he's not out of the woods because they let her out, you know? He's still gonna be held accountable. I just think our presence there, I meet over a couple of days, meet with her, spend some time with her, do a—probably a rotation. We could see what they are comfortable with, see what they want somebody close by and just see what their needs are and serve their needs.
Rhodes: Absolutely. You know, if you and Jon could make that offer. You know, offer her if she wants a close protection team, we'll provide it. But, regardless, people should consider her under our protection. We'll make sure that our people are keeping a close eye on the situation and we're gonna have boots on the ground to keep watch regardless. Because this judge needs to understand that he's not gonna be able to just go grab this lady whenever he feels like it. And there's no, you know, no charge, no grand jury indictment, no jury trial. There's not even a law that he cited, he just grabbed her up and said until you bend to my will I'm going to keep you in jail. And that's not his prerogative. We don't live under an imperial judiciary anymore than we live under an imperial presidency. And this is the kind of problem we're in. We have the executive branch and now the judicial branch claiming that kind of authority. Just point a finger at somebody and have the whisked away without going through the constitutional process. They've got to charge you and then they've got to have a grand jury indict you before they can even charge you. They've got to have a jury trial with your peers and find you guilty and put you in jail and this judge just bypassed that entire process. And that's where our focus is. It's not, like you said before, it's the the underlying subject matter of whether you think gay marriage is appropriate, it's the judge's actions and that's where the focus is gonna stay. So if you two, if you don't mind coordinating with all the other oathkeepers there on the ground and just make that offer of protection for her.
(Talking over each other)
Peyman: This is Denny. I was just asking if you and Jason are still planning on coming in?
Rhodes: Absolutely. I'll be there tomorrow night and then Jason will be landing Thursday. You bet, tell the guys I'll be there tomorrow night. Here's the thing, from what I've read, the judge only let her out—I think the pressure obviously has to do with it, but he's saying he let her out only because her subordinates, her deputy clerks are issuing licenses after he ordered them to do it under the same threat. And so now she's out of jail and she's go to reassert her authority over her own office and you know, her employees, she liable to be grabbed up again by the same judge. So, you know, as far as we're concerned, this is not over. And like you said, this judge needs to be put on notice that his behavior is not going to be accepted and you know, we'll be there to stop it and intercede ourselves if we have to. If the sheriff, who should be interceding is not going to do his job and if the governor is not going to the governor's job of interceding, then we'll do it.
Jackson County Sheriff Denny Peyman then helpfully interjected that they needed to reach out to the Rowan County Sheriff and educate him on how to intercede and turn away federal marshals. The four Oathkeepers spent another 10 minutes outlining their Kentucky plans. Listen to the call here and jump below the fold to read their statement:
STATEMENT BY STEWART RHODES:
We believe Federal District Court Judge David Bunning grossly overstepped his bounds and violated Mrs Davis’ due process rights, and in particular her right to a jury trial. This judge has assumed unto himself not just the powers of all three branches of government, but has also taken on the powers of judge, jury, and “executioner.” What matters to us is not whether you agree with her position on gay marriage or her decision to not issue marriage licenses. What matters is that the judge is violating the Constitution in his anger and desire to punish her for going against his will. We are already being subjected to an unconstitutional imperial presidency, that grew exponentially under both Bush and Obama, expanding the claimed war powers of the president to swallow up our Bill of Rights and circumvent jury trial. The result is an executive branch that claims the absurd power to declare any American an “unlawful combatant” on the say-so of the president alone.
Now we see the rise of an imperial judiciary that not only legislates from the bench but is attempting to expand their “contempt” power to likewise swallow up our Bill of Rights and circumvent jury trial. Both methods are used to allow the powerful office holder to merely point his finger and have his opponent thrown behind bars without a grand jury indictment and without being found guilty by a jury of their peers. No innocent until proven guilty before a jury. Just “guilty” because the leader says so. That is a dictatorship, whether done by a president or by a judge. No one man should have that kind of power in his hands alone to decide guilt and impose a sentence of indefinite detention. Under our Constitution, that dictatorial power does not exist. We must stand against this. And so we will protect her and prevent it from happening again. – Stewart Rhodes
Oathkeepers vow to 'intercede' if U.S. Marshals try to take Kim Davis into custody again
byJen HaydenFollow
228 Comments / 228 New
If the U.S. Marshals are instructed to take Kim Davis into custody, these guys say they will 'intercede.'
The Oathkeepers organization are apparently trying to one-up the Westboro Baptist Church in the department of crazy attention-seeking. In a statement and recorded phone call featuring Oathkeeper's founder Stewart Rhodes, Jackson County (Kentucky) Sheriff Denny Peyman, Missouri Oathkeeper Jon Karriman and West Virginia Oathkeeper Allen Lardieri, the men outlined their plans to head to Kentucky to provide "round-the-clock" protection for Kim Davis to ensure Federal Marshals are not able to take her into custody again if U.S. District Judge David Bunning orders her to be held again on contempt of court charges. The group had previously planned to protest in front of Judge Bunning's home.
Parts of the conversation are transcribed here, the full recording of the call is available below. Emphasis added to highlight the more threatening passages of the conversation:
Rhodes: Sheriff, we were talking earlier and you were voicing your opinion. You think that the heat was coming down and so they are kind of backpedaling. Is that still how you...
Sheriff Peyman: Well, I think you know, everybody's gonna back off. I think it's still too, I think it's important we still have our presence there. Um, just like you say, with an offer of protection. Um, talking with her attorney, let them know, they know we are available now because I heard the conversation with the, uh, secretary, the secretary of the attorney. I still think it's important that our presence be know there because it's not an issue of marriage, it's not an issue of the things they are trying to make the issue. The issue is still that a judge gave an elected official, a citizen of the United States, detained them without cause. Without paperwork, without due process. And I think while everybody else is painting the picture, I think the true picture is just what I said I said about the judge and I still feel he needs to know that he's not out of the woods because they let her out, you know? He's still gonna be held accountable. I just think our presence there, I meet over a couple of days, meet with her, spend some time with her, do a—probably a rotation. We could see what they are comfortable with, see what they want somebody close by and just see what their needs are and serve their needs.
Rhodes: Absolutely. You know, if you and Jon could make that offer. You know, offer her if she wants a close protection team, we'll provide it. But, regardless, people should consider her under our protection. We'll make sure that our people are keeping a close eye on the situation and we're gonna have boots on the ground to keep watch regardless. Because this judge needs to understand that he's not gonna be able to just go grab this lady whenever he feels like it. And there's no, you know, no charge, no grand jury indictment, no jury trial. There's not even a law that he cited, he just grabbed her up and said until you bend to my will I'm going to keep you in jail. And that's not his prerogative. We don't live under an imperial judiciary anymore than we live under an imperial presidency. And this is the kind of problem we're in. We have the executive branch and now the judicial branch claiming that kind of authority. Just point a finger at somebody and have the whisked away without going through the constitutional process. They've got to charge you and then they've got to have a grand jury indict you before they can even charge you. They've got to have a jury trial with your peers and find you guilty and put you in jail and this judge just bypassed that entire process. And that's where our focus is. It's not, like you said before, it's the the underlying subject matter of whether you think gay marriage is appropriate, it's the judge's actions and that's where the focus is gonna stay. So if you two, if you don't mind coordinating with all the other oathkeepers there on the ground and just make that offer of protection for her.
(Talking over each other)
Peyman: This is Denny. I was just asking if you and Jason are still planning on coming in?
Rhodes: Absolutely. I'll be there tomorrow night and then Jason will be landing Thursday. You bet, tell the guys I'll be there tomorrow night. Here's the thing, from what I've read, the judge only let her out—I think the pressure obviously has to do with it, but he's saying he let her out only because her subordinates, her deputy clerks are issuing licenses after he ordered them to do it under the same threat. And so now she's out of jail and she's go to reassert her authority over her own office and you know, her employees, she liable to be grabbed up again by the same judge. So, you know, as far as we're concerned, this is not over. And like you said, this judge needs to be put on notice that his behavior is not going to be accepted and you know, we'll be there to stop it and intercede ourselves if we have to. If the sheriff, who should be interceding is not going to do his job and if the governor is not going to the governor's job of interceding, then we'll do it.
Jackson County Sheriff Denny Peyman then helpfully interjected that they needed to reach out to the Rowan County Sheriff and educate him on how to intercede and turn away federal marshals. The four Oathkeepers spent another 10 minutes outlining their Kentucky plans. Listen to the call here and jump below the fold to read their statement:
STATEMENT BY STEWART RHODES:
We believe Federal District Court Judge David Bunning grossly overstepped his bounds and violated Mrs Davis’ due process rights, and in particular her right to a jury trial. This judge has assumed unto himself not just the powers of all three branches of government, but has also taken on the powers of judge, jury, and “executioner.” What matters to us is not whether you agree with her position on gay marriage or her decision to not issue marriage licenses. What matters is that the judge is violating the Constitution in his anger and desire to punish her for going against his will. We are already being subjected to an unconstitutional imperial presidency, that grew exponentially under both Bush and Obama, expanding the claimed war powers of the president to swallow up our Bill of Rights and circumvent jury trial. The result is an executive branch that claims the absurd power to declare any American an “unlawful combatant” on the say-so of the president alone.
Now we see the rise of an imperial judiciary that not only legislates from the bench but is attempting to expand their “contempt” power to likewise swallow up our Bill of Rights and circumvent jury trial. Both methods are used to allow the powerful office holder to merely point his finger and have his opponent thrown behind bars without a grand jury indictment and without being found guilty by a jury of their peers. No innocent until proven guilty before a jury. Just “guilty” because the leader says so. That is a dictatorship, whether done by a president or by a judge. No one man should have that kind of power in his hands alone to decide guilt and impose a sentence of indefinite detention. Under our Constitution, that dictatorial power does not exist. We must stand against this. And so we will protect her and prevent it from happening again. – Stewart Rhodes
