Patriot Confederation with Ryan Bundy

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:04):
Every patriot has an obligation to question authority. Those who
are honest are not concerned with your watchful vigilance, and
those with integrity are not concerned with your discernment. Every
American is obligated to voice their concerns and stand up
for their freedoms and liberties.

Speaker 2 (00:22):
One nation on your God invisible, with liberty and justice
for wrong.

Speaker 1 (00:31):
Ladies and gentlemen, we are the men in the arena.
We are the Patriot Confederation.

Speaker 3 (00:38):
We will live back down from bye. We're unfreed Americans.

Speaker 2 (01:01):
All right, Ladies and gentlemen, Welcome to Patriot Confederation. For
what is the fourth of November twenty twenty five? The
year is almost over? Yes, only a few what just
under sixty days to go. I'm your host, Bad Billy
out of Twin Falls, Idahope, joined as always by John
Grovenor out of Nashville in New Hampshire, New England. How's

(01:23):
it going up there in the Northeast, going good, Billy?

Speaker 4 (01:27):
You know, getting colder and colder by the day, getting
closer to winter and all. But yeah, we're almost to
that year mark Trump's been in office. I can't wait
to see the recaps.

Speaker 2 (01:36):
Well, I'm keeping a close eye on New York City,
even though I'm not a big fan of New York,
but their election for Mere is a big concern to me.
With that communist running, I don't know if he's still
leading the polls or not, but watching it closely, praying
for Curtis Swiler, but I have a feeling Cuomo's gonna

(01:58):
take it.

Speaker 4 (02:00):
Can you imagine a day and age where being such
a patriotic American is such a bad thing. I mean,
Swallows should be taking his hands down, right. He was
one of the founders of Guardian Angels. He's a guy
who's a true patriot, a true American who stood up
for something, and they look down on him and go
for the communist or the socialist. Shaking my head, brother.

Speaker 2 (02:19):
Yeah, well, joining us this week. Well, if you remember
our fifth episode of Patriot Confederation back in February of
twenty twenty three, we spoke with amm and Bundy. Well,
this week we're speaking with his brother, Ryan Bundy out
of southern Nevada.

Speaker 5 (02:36):
How you doing, brother, good Billy, how are you doing.
I'm doing all right.

Speaker 2 (02:40):
Yeah, Hey, I've got no complaints. Indeed, Yeah, I mean
quite a resume of course, as it's been spoken of before,
Bunker Hill burns. And then in twenty eighteen, you took
a run for governor as an in dependent for the

(03:00):
state of Nevada as well. Fortunately it didn't go your way,
just as it didn't go your brother's way here in
Idaho either. But since then things have been happening. I'm
happy Trump's back in office, I'm not happy with everything
he's doing. And for a while I was happy that

(03:21):
cash Patel was going to be director of the FBI.
Then he appoints somebody to a high position that arrested
a lot of the J sixers, and then I just
couldn't believe it a couple months ago what he did
when he gave that medal of bravery to the agents

(03:44):
who were involved of wounding you and killing LaVoi Finnekam.
I mean overall, when you first heard about that, what
was your immediate reaction.

Speaker 5 (03:55):
No, my immediate reaction is is that there's gotta be
some corruption somewhere, and there always is and there continues
to be so. And you know, those guys, instead of
being given medals of honor and bravery, they should have
been hung or at least prosecuted. I mean they're murderers.
They killed Levoy for with no reason, no cause, and

(04:16):
you know shot me and anyway, they acted in such
a cowardice way. You know, there's no bravery there. There
was no bravery at all.

Speaker 2 (04:27):
No, no. And I was listening to your conversation you
had a couple months back with Brian Hyde when all
this went down, right after he had spoken with Jeanette Finnickum,
and it's like a definitely pouring salt in the wounds.
And then people were trying to give me excuses like
maybe Cash Patel doesn't know the whole story. I'm not

(04:51):
buying that. I'm sorry, Cash Patel is a failure and
he needs to be removed. And I'm not impressed with
Dan Borgino either. Dang, you know, just go back to
patriotic podcasting because he's not doing his job right either.
They're claiming arrests that actually that the FBI is not making.
So it's that system is a failure. It's time to

(05:14):
abolish the FBI. I mean, considering everything you and your
family have been through with the FBI at Bunker Hill
and in Burns too, and and there were things I
didn't know until listening to that interview with that you
had with Brian that basically they they like to call

(05:35):
it a stand off where basically, you know, you were
like you and your brother were like, uh, what's his name, Uh,
David Koresh down in Waco, and who entrapped himself in
that compound? And of course, you know, and it wasn't
anything like that at all, was it.

Speaker 3 (05:54):
No.

Speaker 5 (05:55):
Our doors were open, we had people in and out.

Speaker 6 (05:58):
There were people from the Unity funding and going, and
we were putting on seminars and you know, media was
in and out. There was It wasn't it wasn't a compound.
In fact, even on that matter, going back to whether
or not these guys were brave, you know, there was
a there was.

Speaker 5 (06:16):
An issue at hand that needed to be resolved. That's
why we were there trying to bring light to this issue.
And you know, with the FBI setting up and the
way they were acting, we had you know, several conversations
with them over the phone where we invited them to
sit down at the table and let's discuss these matters

(06:37):
to see if we can bring a resolution to the
problems that are going on. And of course they refused
to meet because they are cowards. They are cowards. They
didn't want to resolve the issue. They didn't want to
address the real matter at hand. All they wanted to
do is to paint us to look like some sort
of terrorist organization and figure out how to kill us.

(07:00):
And that's and that's what they did. Now, that is
just cowardice. That's not brave. They're you know, they're that's
not brave at all.

Speaker 2 (07:09):
I'd like to go to and I honestly hate bringing
this up because I don't want to bring any nightmares
to life again. But I just have to get some
clarity on some things. You know, you said in the
interview with Brian and you didn't know whether or not
Lavoy was armed, and it didn't matter whether or not

(07:30):
he was armed, really it didn't.

Speaker 5 (07:32):
Why would it matter. We have the right to keeping
bare arms, and he should have been armed whether he
was or not. I don't I'm not certain he normally was.
He normally had firearms, but so did I and so
does everybody else and has the right to keeping bare arms.
We should all be armed all the time, and so
what's wrong with being armed?

Speaker 2 (07:53):
Exactly? I agree with you, you know, but uh, I
sat down on a podcast all with one of these
spaces they have on X where you know, you talk live.
There's no cameras or anything. And it was a bunch
of law enforcement officers. It was right after, you know,

(08:15):
that the Medals of Bravery were being awarded, and I
asked these officers or for retired officers their thoughts on it,
and one thing they said was that Lavoy had pulled
his gun and he got shot. Basically in their nice way,
they said, f a fo And it made me so mad.

(08:38):
You know, I didn't say a word. I just left.
I watched the video though, and to me, it didn't
look like Lavoy had time to pull a weapon. He
got he got out of his vehicle, said something like
what you're gonna shoot me? And they just opened fired
and executed him.

Speaker 5 (08:55):
Well, there's a little bit more to it than that,
but you know, there were there were shots fired prior
to him getting out. There was no reason to make
a stop. Like I said, we were on our way
to meet with the sheriff of Grant County and there
was you know, and and basically Lavoy said, Hey, that's

(09:16):
where I'm going. I'm gonna go meet the sheriff. You
guys are welcome to follow me. There was no reason
for them to stop us, none at all. We had
not committed any crimes. There was no probable cause to
believe that we had. Uh, there wasn't even a rest
warrants out for us. They didn't. They didn't make arrest
warrants until the next day. And but you know, when

(09:37):
it comes down to LaVoi, he didn't. He didn't pull it.
He didn't pull a gun. I mean, the video shows
that clear. They I do believe that they shot uh,
you know, a rubber bullet at him, hit him in
the side, and because of that pain, he you know,
he put his hands to the side. And then they

(09:58):
used that to say, oh, he is going for a gun,
and and they used that to justify killing him. But
that's not what happened.

Speaker 2 (10:07):
Wow. Wow, this is just mind boggling. It's blood boiling. John.
I know you're waiting to say something before we go
to breaks better.

Speaker 4 (10:17):
I remember, I remember when it happened and seeing the
video afterward, and what I seen him do is touch
his chest.

Speaker 2 (10:25):
That's all he did.

Speaker 4 (10:25):
I didn't know it was illegal to touch your chest
or threat to the officers. A threat with deadly force
to touch touch your chest and uh, but then that's
when they opened fire. I thought they had to have
a clear impressant danger to use deadly force, and obviously
it wasn't. Unless I'm wrong, it wasn't.

Speaker 3 (10:43):
Uh.

Speaker 5 (10:44):
Well, here's something that I can tell you. The video
that you see that everybody sees, it's kind of blurry,
it's kind of and they don't have the sound I've
seen the original. The original was crystal clear and it
had sound with it, and you could hear the gunshots.
It sounded like gunshots prior to him reaching for his

(11:06):
chest or his side or whatever you want to call it.
And like I said, we don't believe that that was
a true bullet. That's we believe was a rubber bullet
or non lethal less than lethal bullet, and we believe
that it was designed to make him look like he
was reaching. Besides, he was in knee deep snow. He

(11:27):
was having a hard time just stepping around, I mean,
just trying to keep his balance. He could swing his
arm trying you know, he had his hands up more
or less. And you know, here's the thing. Lavoy was
a smart man. Do you think love Boy is really
going to reach for a gun when he knows he's
got guns trained on him. I mean, exactly what idiot

(11:50):
would do that? Low Boy's not an.

Speaker 4 (11:51):
Idiot if he wanted to take law enforcement out when
he just drove him in instead of snow banking his vehicle.

Speaker 5 (11:57):
Well, see, then that's the other thing. I don't know.
You watched that video real close, you know, back again
to the to the award that cash would tell you
they're like, oh, you know, he run he tried to
run a guy over. No, the whole reason we were
stuck in the snow bank is because he prevented or
avoided hitting that guy. So you know, Lavoy's design was

(12:19):
to go around that truck as the uh that was
at the blockade, and there was a guy who was
either in the back of that truck or on the
side of that truck who thought that the boy was
going to hit the truck, and so he jumps behind
the truck right in front of the boy, and La
boy turned to the left, which placed him into the

(12:41):
bank of snow and made us get stuck. So by
the very act of Lavoy saving that guy's life again,
we might have made it around the side of that truck,
And the only reason we didn't is because Lavoy avoided
hitting that man. And so in the very act of
saving that man's life, they killed him.

Speaker 4 (13:01):
Don't you think that they've set it up that way
for him to run into the snow bank. I mean,
they did have a vehicle blocking then another vehicle, and
like you said, they had a small bit of space
opened up that he may or may not have been
able to squeeze through.

Speaker 2 (13:15):
But it's as if this whole thing was a set
up from the start. Did not feel that way to you.

Speaker 5 (13:19):
Oh, certainly it was. That's why they had the roadblock
there anyway, all I all I'm saying is that we
were trying to get around, We were trying to reach safety,
we were trying to get to the sheriff of Grant County.
We were trying to just mind our own business. We
were trying to do good, and we were doing good.
There was nothing wrong or evil about what we were doing.

(13:42):
And if the FBI thinks that they can go around
killing people and you know, for standing their ground and
doing what's right, well that's what's wrong with this country.

Speaker 3 (13:54):
Oh.

Speaker 2 (13:55):
Absolutely, As we've seen here in Idaho, up Ridge and
of course in Waco, Texas, and then both both you know,
Bunker Hill and Burns, Oregon. We are at the first quarter,
so we're gonna take our first break and we'll be
back in about two minutes. All right, ladies and gentlemen,

(14:18):
we are back. By the way, John, did you like
that commercial for We the People Holsters? That was a
good one. Man. Well that's where Suno came in handy. Ah. Yeah,
played with some Sono on that one. Huh, Yeah, I
like it, yes, indeed. So getting back to the conversation

(14:39):
here with Ryan Bundy. Ryan, there's one thing that had
me really curious when I watched the video. You know,
I watched the video. You were talking about the aerial footage,
and yeah, it was blurry and and there was no sound,
and it they made it look like Lavoy had run
somebody over when I knew that was doctored. But one

(15:00):
thing that just kind of got me is, you know,
I'm watching that video that was taken that was withinside
the vehicle with all of you, and you're all being
shot at, and I would have never guessed in a
million years that you got hit because you didn't cry
out in pain or anything. Well, I mean, was that

(15:21):
just fearing adrenaline mix that you didn't feel it or what?

Speaker 5 (15:27):
Well, I've been shot before that, so I recognized how
it felt. But it didn't hit bone nor anything. It
was just a flesh wound. But I recognized it right
away that I was hit, But there was no need
of causing a big scene with the gals and stuff

(15:48):
in there. And I wasn't hurt that bad, you know,
I don't know, most people don't even realize it. But
I was hit before La boy ever even got out
of the truck. So you know, we stop and he
jumps out right away, but they you know, but you
notice that there's a the glass in that window that
on next two shatters, and I was hit. At that point,

(16:11):
I assumed the bullet had come through that glass, but
the trajectory would have never worked.

Speaker 2 (16:18):
And so.

Speaker 5 (16:20):
I think that there must have been two bullets come
in from two different shots about the same time. And
because the one that hit me and he came through
the roof at the back of the truck. And so
I don't know what broke the window. Something else did.

Speaker 2 (16:40):
And one thing a bit of fiction here, John, I
don't know if you've ever watched that show on Paramount
that's called Mayor at Kingston. It's another one of Taylor
Sheridan's projects that he had going. But they just released
the latest season, and yeah, it's a cop ends up

(17:02):
going to prison because because he shot another cop during
during some kind of standoff in the previous season, and uh,
he gets assaulted. Once he gets into the prison, he
gets assaulted real bad. But he gets put in his
cell and it's somebody else into the other cell mat
or not his cellmate, but sell next to him tells him,

(17:24):
if you want to live, don't go to the infirmary.
And that brings me to you. Ryan. It's like you
you had that lead in your shoulder. From what I understand,
you recently had it removed, if I'm not mistaken, but
you kind of had that mindset, if you want to live,

(17:45):
don't don't go to the hospital.

Speaker 5 (17:48):
Well, it hasn't been removed. It's still in my shoulder.
We've been talking about it that it hasn't happened yet.

Speaker 2 (17:54):
Oh my goodness. Yeah, But but that was your mindset,
is to you were you were afraid that if you
would have gone to the hospital, you would wouldn't have
come back because Lavoy finneckm was assassinated there. It wasn't
it wasn't just murdered. In my opinion, he was assassinated.
And uh, well.

Speaker 5 (18:14):
There's there's more to it than that too. So some
of this, you know, I couldn't. I couldn't pinpoint and
verify all of it, but uh, you know, they hauled
me to the hospital. They took Lavoy's body to the hospital,
and from what I understand that of the nurses and

(18:36):
or other medical staff there that worked on both Lavoy
and I, three of them within just a month committed
suicide supposedly, but it was awful mysterious because they were
shot in the back of the head more or less
than uh. I don't know how you do that with suicide.

(18:57):
And then not only that, there were supposedly two other
people who pulled up onto the scene. Again, we were
behind roadblocks and supposedly had the whole area quarantined off,
and yet a snowboll snow a guy and a snowmobile
came up and also as though must have been inside

(19:18):
the roadblocks, he drove up and I believe that because
of their presence, they had to stop shooting. I think
it was their goal to just kill us all and
you know, and make it look like that we had
this big battle and we lost. But I understood or
heard that those guys were also dead within six weeks

(19:42):
or something after that incident. Now I can't verify those
the nurses, there's records on them, but it's awful mysterious.
Is all insane?

Speaker 2 (19:52):
Yeah, and you just said too. And they took Lavoy's
body to the hospital. But it's to my understanding that
they left his body in the snow for what up
to six hours, causing his body to deform from frostbite?
Is that true?

Speaker 5 (20:08):
I do not know that.

Speaker 2 (20:09):
No, Okay, yeah, that's what I heard. That's what I heard.
Even Brian told me that something along those lines as well.
You know. So I don't know what the purpose of
that is. Is rubbing more salt in the wound? It
seems like I don't know.

Speaker 5 (20:26):
But I'll tell you what did I'll tell you What
did bother me though, is he was dead and yet
they went and handcuffed him anyway?

Speaker 3 (20:36):
What?

Speaker 5 (20:37):
Oh, yes, they had him handcuffed while he was dead.

Speaker 2 (20:41):
This what are they can't do?

Speaker 5 (20:44):
You?

Speaker 2 (20:46):
I can't even wrap my mind around that. I'm just
you have me speechless there, Ryan.

Speaker 5 (20:52):
Wow, that's what I saw. That's the truth.

Speaker 2 (20:54):
So well, I believe you.

Speaker 5 (20:56):
I don't know, but I know that they handcuffed him.

Speaker 4 (20:59):
I think that's a common practice. I don't know why
necessarily if you know he's passed, but I think that's
a common practice.

Speaker 2 (21:09):
I just got no words. I mean, I mean, every
time I look over the over the story or is whatever,
I my blood just starts boiling. And you can tell
I'm starting to stutter, which is sometimes it happens when
I get mad. But wow, it's just unbelievable that the

(21:30):
links they will go. It's almost like that they have
no conscience or no limits. My goodness, you know. And
I don't know if you have Paramount Network or not
Paramount Plus. I got it on my Roku. But they
have a series of documentaries called The FBI Files, and

(21:51):
the first two episodes are are about Bunker Hill and
then to be continued Burns Oregon, So all about the
Bundy family the way they painted you guys.

Speaker 5 (22:03):
Program is that which what are you talking about?

Speaker 2 (22:06):
Uh? I think it's called the FBI Files. It's on
Paramount Plus. If you have that, and boy, they they yeah,
they made they made your dad look look like a monster.
They made am and looked like a monster. It made
it just infuriated me, completely infuriated me.

Speaker 5 (22:25):
Well, they're not interested in the truth. They're not interested
in the true matters, you know, just just for that mode.
Even even on this show yet, we haven't mentioned why
we were really there. Does that does anyone even make
ask that question? Why were they at Burns? What were
they doing there? And and do you guys know why
we were there?

Speaker 2 (22:46):
Well, I listened to your brother speak about it one
night when he was campaigning right here in Twin Falls,
and he said, after Bunker Hill, he said, the Hamon
family was actually getting it worse then you guys were
from the b l M. So you know they it
was your dad who said, these people need help, please
go assist them.

Speaker 5 (23:07):
Correct, But it's you know, it's deeper than that. You know, Yes,
that's generally what we were doing, was helping the Hammonds.
But you got to realize understand what was going on
with the Hammonds and why it was so atrocious that
we had to go help. So the Hammonds, they're a
ranching family there in the Burns, Oregon area, which is

(23:30):
where the Malleor National Wildlife Refuge it resides or is situated.
And you've got to understand that that Malleur National Wildlife
Refuge was not always a refuge. It was ranches and
logging and various mining things going on. In Harney County

(23:53):
in Oregon used to be the most wealthy county in Oregon.
They had the most industry, the most you know, these
things that were bringing work and prosperity were taking place
there in Harney County and nowadays it is the poorest
county in the an Oregon So what changed? What happened, Well,

(24:20):
what happened is is the government came in the Bureau
of Land Management, the Park Service, and they created this
wildlife refuge and in so doing they gobbled up the
rights of the people they from from the stories that
we heard is that they destroyed over one hundred ranches

(24:44):
to make the Malleur National Wildlife Refuge, and not only
the ranchers, but they shut down logging and mining in
the area. There used to be a huge sawmill in Burns,
Oregon and now there's nothing. Oh and so the government
present is presents and domineering attitude and claiming that they

(25:08):
own and control the land is what was bringing poverty
to this area. And even as it was currently or
while we were there, over half the population worked for
the government. And why would they do that, well, because
that was the only thing you could do. They'd shut

(25:28):
down all the real industry, shut down all the ranchers
and logging and mining, and so just to survive, people
would take whatever jobs they can get, which primarily were
all government jobs. But there's not enough of them. And
so the Havens are a ranch here and there's and
the Malorat National Wildlife Refuge pretty much encompasses or or

(25:53):
circumnavigates around their ranch, and they're the next ones on
the chalking block. The Mallear, the Wildlife Refuge wants to
eliminate the Hammonds so that they can incorporate their ranch
into the wildlife Refuge, the same as they had done
to many others previous to that. And so they had

(26:15):
been trying for years to get that done, and the
Hammonds were standing their ground and not allowing it to happen.
And you know, there were several confrontations. One such place
is where the Hammonds owned water rights at a spring,
and yet the government came in and put a fence
around it, you know, the government. Then the Hammonds opened

(26:37):
it up, and anyway, that turned into a battle, and
then they tried to arrest the Hammonds over that. The
actual incidences that they did gain power over them was
over some controlled burns. Now, one thing most people don't
realize is that controlled burns and prescribe burns, if you
want to call them that. You know, people for ages

(27:02):
have been using fire to control the range and improve
the range. Absolutely. What happens is is that over duration
of time, the brush grows up, it gets too big,
it becomes decatent. It you know, it shades the ground,
It prevents you know, other you know, grasses and other

(27:23):
forages from growing. And so the only way to clear
that economically is to burn it. You know, Native Americans
have been using you know, controlled burns for you know,
hundreds of years, thousands of years. It's just a common
practice amongst people who manage land, you know, in such
a situation. Now, even the government uses controlled burns from

(27:46):
time to time. Now, the Hammonds there were two particular
fires at question. One of them was where the government
had actually set fire and the fire was you know,
coming and threatening the Hammond's ranch and property, household, private property.

(28:08):
So the Hammond set a backfire to do a controlled burn,
to try to create a buffer so that the big
fire didn't get them. Well in that process, supposedly the
controlled burn went you know, on to supposed government land
and burnt like one acre of land. Well, you know,
the government was already burning I don't know how many

(28:31):
hundreds of acres, so what what does this one acre
have to do? And another burn was similar, but I
think the Hammonds themselves are just burning some of their
own private property. And again it went over the fence
and burnt you know, an acre to maybe five acres
of supposed you know, refuge land or you know, public

(28:57):
land or whatever. Now Here's the interesting thing though, is
that even though it might have been considered public land,
the Hammond still had grazing rights upon that land, So
it was still their land in the sense that they
have a right on it to graze. So it wasn't
like they were just out burning you know, obscure or

(29:19):
you know land somewhere in the middle of Timbuk to
nowhere that they had no you know, authority or jurisdiction
over and so between these two burns. The government uh said, oh,
we're gonna charge you with arson, but not just arson.
They use the Anti Terrorism and an Effective Death Penalty Act, which,

(29:42):
by the way, was the act that was created after
the Oklahoma City bombing to prevent such things as explosives, bombings,
fires in a terroristic type manner, which have nothing to
do with a ranch, nothing to do with improved in
the range. And you know, and and either way, they

(30:06):
they uh uh charge the Hammonds with this arson under
the Effective Death Penalty and Anti Terrorism Act. Now here's
the interesting thing. In fact, I'm going to reach up
and grab uh. Well, this is the uhical rules and

(30:26):
codebook and I'm hoping I can find it.

Speaker 4 (30:31):
So, Brian, we want to hold that for a cliffhanger.

Speaker 2 (30:34):
I think we got to take a break, don't we, Billy, Yes, yes,
so we'll well we'll come back and plus there some
things to touch on too, because he's bringing up some
interesting facts. We'll be back in about three minutes. All right,
ladies and gentlemen, we are back once again, joined by
Ryan Bundy, and uh, Ryan, just have you continue. Uh

(30:57):
you were about to read something there and then I
I got something to follow up on too with everything
you've been saying.

Speaker 5 (31:05):
So what I wanted to bring up, See, now this
is not under eighteen USC. Section eighteen fifty five exempts
fire set by an a lot e. Now, and a
lot e is the term they use for ranchers who
have an allotment for cattle. And so there is a

(31:28):
this section that the latter part of eighteen fifty five
exempts fire set by an a lot e in the
reasonable exercise of his proprietary rights in the allotment from
being prosecuted as an arson. In other words, a rancher
can set a fire, a controlled burn, to to control

(31:49):
decatent brush and grass or what need what needs he
be and not be prosecuted for arson. Now, this should
have been brought up in the in the Hammond's defense,
but whatever lawyer they had was too inept to figure
this out and too inept, and so they allowed the

(32:10):
Hammonds to be prosecuted and convicted because this, this very
section of the Criminal Code was not you know, shared
with the jury, and so Dwight and Stephen Hammond were
convicted of a crime they didn't commit because their their

(32:33):
acts were not criminal. Their acts were simply trying to
protect their their rats and or improvement. And interestingly enough,
the fires didn't burn any buildings, they didn't burn any structures,
they didn't do any damage. The fires were on, you know,
just bare ground that had you know, some brush and
grass on it did no harm. Another thing was is

(32:57):
that this prosecution had been going on for ten years.
I mean by the time they actually convicted them of it,
you know that brush had long since grown back, probably
needed to be burnt again. And yet here they are,
you know, still going after these guys. Well, here's the thing.
The government wasn't worried about the brush. They weren't worried

(33:19):
about the grass. That wasn't their point. Their point is
that they wanted to destroy the Hammonds. The point is
that they wanted to take over their ranch. And because
the Hammonds hadn't fallen for their ployees, they had to
go after them in another way. And so what they
were doing was trying to make criminals out of them,
prosecute them, persecute them, put them in prison, stress them

(33:43):
until that their ranch folded financially because they can't. You
can't maintain a viable ranch when you're in prison. And
so this is what they what they had done. Now,
during that trial, at the end of the judge there
recognized that this was a bit atrocious. However, they were

(34:07):
convicted by a jury, and so the judge had to
sentence them. And by the way, with that Anti terrorism
an Effective death Penalty Act, the minimum penalty for such
a thing was five years. And the judge just said,
you know what this is, This is not right. This

(34:27):
is you know, shocks the conscious or whatever. There's no
way I'm sending them to five years. So he sentenced
to Dwight, who is the older gentleman, to I believe
eight eight or nine months. And then Steven the son,
he sentenced him to a year or fourteen months or

(34:47):
something like that. And they did go to prison, and
they did fill their terms, and then they came home.
Now this is where we come in. Where we come
in was because they had come home now that judge
had retired and now a new judge was setting and
the government still hadn't accomplished their goals to take their ranch.

Speaker 2 (35:07):
And so real quick, Ryan, I just want to point
one thing out too. When you talk about controlled burning,
I know exactly what you're talking about because I have
an uncle who owns about fifty acres, and I used
to help him with that. In fact, I remember the
first time we did it. I'm like, why are we
doing this? He said, well, we're making a little fire

(35:28):
to prevent a big fire. That's right.

Speaker 5 (35:32):
Anyways, So, because the government had to accomplish their goal
of taking over their rants just yet, they had to
try to stress the Hammonds more. And so they petitioned
the courts and said, oh, they didn't fill the minimum sentence,
and so they went back.

Speaker 2 (35:50):
Say again, I didn't say anything. I think there was
go on, Mitch.

Speaker 5 (35:56):
So they went back to the courts and said, hey,
the Hammonds need to be resentenced and they need to
fill their minimum sentence of the five years. And so
the new judge did that, and that is double jeopardy.
They'd already been sentenced, they had already filled their time,
and now they're gonna make him go back to prison.

(36:19):
And you got to realize that, Dwight. I'm not exactly
sure how old he was. I think he was like
eighty four eighty five, and now you're gonna send him
to prison for five years. I mean, it's probably a
death sentence. He's probably not coming out, you know, he's
going to be ninety years old by the time he
comes out if he survives to prison, you know, and Steven,
you know how he's a father with young kids, and

(36:41):
you know, again, but they don't care about men's lives,
they don't care about rights, they don't care about justice,
they don't care about the truth. They were there to
destroy the Hammons and to take their ranch. And this
is how they're going to do it. And so that's Siri,
that's what we got involved with. Now. The way we

(37:01):
got involved was, first of all, we made petitions of
redress agreements, which you know, the right to petition and
regress your a grievances are protected under the First Amendment.
And so what is a redress agreements? To redress means
to you know, bring it up, you know, address it,
and to correct it. A grievance, of course, is something

(37:24):
that's you know, something that's causing us harm. Now wasn't
causing us harm, but it's causing the the the the
Hammond's harm. But further more than that, to allow this
type of injustice to go on is causing all of
America harm because you know, it becomes if we allow
that kind of thing to take place, then it's going

(37:44):
to take place time and time again. And so there's
a problem here. We can't allow double jeopardy to take place.
And besides, they weren't guilty to begin with, and even
though they weren't guilty to begin with, they'd still spent
prison time for it. And so we somebody, somebody had
to step in and help, and we first of all

(38:05):
sent our petitions of redress and grievance to you know,
to the local county commissioners and county sheriff. We sent
them to the to the to the state legislatures. These
are the people who are elected who are supposed to
protect our rights. That's their job, that's their duty, and

(38:26):
we were trying to point out to them, hey, there's
a problem here. Let's step back and reanalyze this deal,
and let's get it fixed, and let's get it right
instead of sending the Hammonds back to prison. Absolutely, and
so at first we started to gain a little bit
of I guess, recognition or gain some attention from these

(38:52):
legislatures and these people who we're talking with, and then
all of a sudden it stopped. Well why did it stop,
Well because the f the I stepped in and started
to say, oh no, you guys can't do this, and
you know, leave it alone, and basically started to direct
the a are elected officials, Our elected officials. They're not

(39:14):
subjects and serfs or slaves to the federal government. They're
not subject to the whims and you know of the FBI.
So they should have kicked the FBI and the teeth
and said get out of here. But no, people are
too scared. People are too cowardice to be able to
do what they need to do. And I'm talking about
our elected officials. Our elected officials don't understand who they

(39:38):
are or what they're really supposed to do. You know,
the only legitimate purpose for government is to aid the
individuals in claiming, using, and defending their rights. And in
this particular case, the Hammonds needed all three that well,
they needed The Hammonds had claimed their rights, they weren't
relinquishing those claims, and they needed some help to continue

(40:02):
to use them, and they certainly needed some help to
defend them. And you know that first, and you know
that the main right that they needed to protect was
their right to liberty. They again, they had not committed
any crime. And so when when they stopped listening and

(40:23):
they stopped talking to us because of the direction from
the FBI. Then we realized that we're going to have
to do something more. In other words, our letters and
our petitions of redress agrievances is falling on deaf ears.
They're not going to stop. They're going to just send
the Hans to prison regardless, and they're not going to

(40:45):
redress this problem. That's when we decided we needed to
do something more. And so the decision was made to
go into the wildlife Refuge and to possess that. And
again we did that legally. We did that under the
concept of uh now I'm blanking my mind all of

(41:09):
a sudden talking no, no, not peaceably assemble at all,
well real quickly posession. We did it under the rules
and procedures of adverse possession. And every state, by the way,
has laws on the books that allows for adverse possession
to take place, and so we followed those procedures. In

(41:34):
other words, we were not I mean, we were not
committed any crime while we were there. I mean, the
most that they could have tried to charge us with
was trustpassing, and we would have loved had they charged
us with trust that passing, because we could have then
challenged their ownership of the property, because according to the Constitution,

(41:57):
the federal government has no right to own or control
price property within admitted state of the Union, and therefore
we would have forced this issue and brought this unconstitutional
land control to light. And so we were using adverse
possession to occupy this this refuge, and of course we

(42:19):
knew that it was going to bring, you know, media
a response to that, to where we could talk about
and bring to light the problem that was going on
with the Hammonds and try greater attention for their cause.

Speaker 2 (42:38):
And Ryan, hey, I'm sorry, I got to stop you
there because we got to take our final break and
then of course this is just going by fast, so
we'll be back to wrap it up here in just
under two minutes. All right, ladies and gentlemen, We are
back in just a little under ten minutes left. And

(42:59):
it's just gone by way too fast, and there's so
much information to give and it just seems like not
enough time within an hour. Uh, Ryan, I want to
point something out too really quick. Is what what you
were talking about as far as as uh, you know

(43:20):
what the count handy County used to be is. I
think that's how it's pronounced Harney Harney County, Okay. I
used to I lived in Coos Bay, Oregon when I
was ten years old, and of course that that area
on the coast there just surrounded by mass forests and
there's a lot of fishing there. It was a great

(43:41):
place to live as a kid. My uncle, who I
was living with at the time, worked for Warehouser, And uh,
this is what I understand because I talked to somebody
else who lives in Oregon and he just laid it
out for me. Yeah, you know, between I think it

(44:03):
up until nineteen the nineteen fifties, until the nineteen eighties,
they only had one bad wildfire because they were logging
and managing the forest and everything. And ever since the
environmentalists and all the liberals came into Oregon and took
over everything, like they're like they're trying to do the
Hammond's mind. You they're you know, they have wildfires every year.

(44:30):
Every year they're having wildfires.

Speaker 5 (44:34):
Well in that area, I had heard about a fire
in the forest that the government, the Forest Service, had
set trying to supposedly do a control burn that got
away from them, and I understood that it burnt down.
I don't know, forty cabins or something of the sort.
I don't know the exact number. And of course the

(44:57):
government wouldn't take you know, accountability or an thing, you know,
you know, in other words, they can start a fire,
they can burn a whole bunch of stuff down. It
doesn't matter if he gets out of control with them,
they're not going to accept liability. And so you know,
forty cabin owners were just out of cabins, you know,
full expense on them, you know. But then they want

(45:18):
to try to prosecute the Hammonds. We're burning a couple,
you know, acres of prairie grass and treat them like terrorists.
And it's such a such a contrast of of happenings there.

Speaker 2 (45:29):
Now, I want to I want to shift gears with
what little time we have left and talk about your
brother a little bit, because I've been concerned about him,
as I told you before, I've been praying for him
because I know that him and his family are just
going through a horrible ordeal. In fact, I don't know

(45:50):
if you've heard, but they they raised the lawsuit from
fifty four million to sixty million on him. And you know,
first of all, I just got to ask you if
you hear from him often, and how's he doing with
all this? What happening to him?

Speaker 5 (46:10):
Well, I speak to him almost on a daily basis,
at least every every few days anyway, So I'm in
close contact with him. And I believe that that raise
in the judgment. I don't know exactly what it is,
but I think they're trying to add interest in legal
fees from the you know, the attorney's coming after him.

(46:34):
It's just it's just a bunch more of that maloney,
you know, as far as how he's doing. You know,
they've they've taken everything he's had. And not only have
they taken everything he's had, but you know, they've prevented
him from being able to earn any money because anytime
he tries to do anything to you know, to make

(46:57):
a living for his family, you know what, you got
to have a bank account to, you know, and to
run a business. And so whatever business he tries or
starts or does, you know, they just go in there
and wipe the bank account out and basically shut his
business down. And they've done this now about five different times.
And so he's basically had to, you know, I don't know,

(47:21):
earn a living. It's been very, very difficult for him
to provide for his family. For the past two years,
he's actually been living in a friend's attic, quite frankly,
with his entire family sleeping in one bedroom together. It's
kind of an attic, granted it was fixed up, it's
you know, it's got kind of a living quarters in

(47:42):
the kitchen area and in a bedroom, but it's just
one bedroom, which is you know, he and his wife
and four children were all sleeping in one bedroom in
this attic and he's ringing that for two years because
he hasn't been a you know, with without a bank,
without an income, without any resources, you know. I mean,

(48:05):
how's he supposed to to get credit? You know, you
can't even rent an apartment under those conditions, you know.

Speaker 2 (48:12):
And I'd like to get your taker. I don't know
if you heard about this too, but from what I understand,
the judge in Boise, who was presiding over the case,
this is a rumor I heard. I don't know if
it's true or not, but from what I gather, her
husband works for the Bureau of Land Management and part

(48:34):
of This is they're seeing is revenge over Bunker Hill.

Speaker 5 (48:38):
Oh. Absolutely, yes, that is true. Her husband, you know,
is an employee of the Bureau of Land Management, and
I certainly do believe that that is what's taking place.
You know, now that might be hard to prove that
that's what's taking place, but you know, when it comes
down to, you know, they they got the judgment against him,

(49:00):
which by the way, was all kinds of messed up there.
But then they then they rounded up a jury to
decide how much he should pay. And the jury was
stacked with you know, hospital staff from the hospital and
or other medical facilities. It had several you know, federal

(49:20):
government you know employees, particularly b A.

Speaker 3 (49:23):
Lamb.

Speaker 5 (49:24):
In other words, it was a stack to jury against him,
and so they certainly did use that opportunity to you know,
just punish him for everything that he's been standing up for.
So yeah, that's true.

Speaker 2 (49:38):
Yeah, And in fact, I've got I've got some friends
and family that you know, one one girl I've known since,
uh since her and I were little kids, and she
puts on Facebook, Yeah, he deserves everything he gets. I'm like,
you don't even realize what that man stands for. You
just listen to the mainstream media and you believe everything

(50:02):
you hear on TV, and you let him demonize that
man against you when he when he would have been
the best governor Idaho has ever seen. But well that's
my opinion anyway.

Speaker 5 (50:13):
Certainly, you know, and we can't forget about baby Cyrus.
I'm Cyrus. So let me tell you about them a
little bit because I know them personally. I knew his
mother and father prior to them even marrying. I knew them.
And you know his mother particularly, she's got you know,

(50:34):
several siblings, brothers and sisters. Man, they are they are
a good family. They are good people. They are they're
the type of people that that we should all be.
They're good people. And you know then she uh Levi,
I mean she meets this guy's names Levi. She marries him.
You know, they they and they have a child. They

(50:58):
have this little baby, Cyrus Is and they're doing the
best they can to raise him and do well. And
you know, they recognize that. You know, he was small,
he was lightweight. You know, he was only I don't
know what was he ten months old or so. I
can't remember exactly how old he was. But you know,
he'd been surviving from birth until then, you know, just

(51:19):
on his mother's milk. She was still nursing, and they
were trying to get him on some solid food, you know,
you know, that's what you do about that age, just
start introducing him to some other food besides milk. And
he was having a hard time digesting that, and he
would throw that other food up. And so because because
they did love him, because they did care for him,

(51:42):
they said, well, let's take him to the hospital. Let's
see if there's you know, we can figure out what
the problem is. And instead of treating those that mother
and father like good people, they accused them of neglect
and malnutrition and abuse that was not taking place. I
can guarantee you that was not taking place. It was

(52:06):
good people, you know. And then they go to the
point where they're they're gonna take this child away. What
justification do they have to do that? Just making stuff up?

Speaker 2 (52:19):
Oh, I can tell I can tell you where they're
going with this because I read one of the comments
and then I'll tell you this, and then we got
to wrap it up, and I do apolygude, But yeah,
I saw one really hateful comment on Facebook that baby
Cyrus needed to be rescued from Nazi parents, so we

(52:40):
got to.

Speaker 5 (52:40):
Take them away. Well they're not Nazis, by the way,
they're assault of the earth, good patriot people. They're they're
they're good people. And here and here's the interesting thing. Okay,
So so somebody had to help them. And you know, Ammon,
he's the type of guy that steps up. Now, we
all were, we all helped. I went to I know,
I was there. I was right in the middle of it.

(53:02):
You know, they didn't come and sue me. They suit Ammon,
he's got a you know, bigger voice or whatever. My
point is is that somebody had to help him. Now
here's the here's the proofs in the pudding. We got
Cyrus back. He was only gone a week. Within six
seven days, we had him back with his mom and
his dad. Now since then, mom and dad of course

(53:23):
were smart enough never to go back to the hospital,
and so he still has whatever problem he was having
and they got to try to figure it out on
their own. Now, because you can't count on any help
from the hospital. They're gonna steal your child. Now, I
can tell you that, you know, they did have a
little bit of trouble, but Babe Cyrus is alive, he's well,

(53:45):
he's doing good.

Speaker 3 (53:46):
Uh.

Speaker 5 (53:46):
They were able to figure out some stuff and now
we're several years down the road and baby Cyrus is
just fine.

Speaker 2 (53:53):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (53:54):
That's the help of any CPS or medical uh you know,
traditional hospital anyway, they did. They did seek some medical
help through you know, natural pathics means and what not
to to help him through his problems. But hey, he
got through him.

Speaker 2 (54:11):
Now he's okay, absolutely well. We are out of time, Ryan,
I want to thank you very much, uh for the
time that you've given us today and on tap for
next week, we're going to welcome back Terry Newsom, who's
holding the line. And of course, uh what I was
told is the biggest outdoor shooting range in the world

(54:34):
of that being Chicago. You remember John spoke with We
spoke with him. Well we're gonna be welcoming him back
next week. Awesome. Yes, Ryan, God bless you and thank
you so much for your time and uh it's been
it's been educational for me. And uh, keep in touch
because I think we need to have you on again

(54:56):
in the future.

Speaker 5 (54:57):
Give me a call we can schedule another time. Thanks.

Speaker 2 (55:00):
Thank you, you bet, and ladies and gentlemen, thank you very
much for tuning into Patriot Confederation. God save the Republic
of the United States of America.

Speaker 3 (55:12):
We will live back down from buying. We're gonna feed America.