Rinehart letter to President Trump

[ratled]

As promised this week's letter to the president is asking for help in the Rinehart case. If you write only one letter please make it this one. A little different this week I am also asking you send a copy to the DOJ, https://www.justice.gov/doj/webform/your-message-department-justice
I want to show Brandon our continuing support so I am asking that you post note here that a letter was sent.

As always, please send your letter to the president here https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact#page

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Trump,

SUPPORT BRANDON RINEHART

The West Coast independent gold miners and prospectors have been asking you for assistance to get us back to work in the face of the environmental movements massive push to over regulate us out of existence.

The State of California unconstitutionally tried and convicted Mr. Brandon Rinehart for using his federal mining rights on his federal mining claim. They required a permit but refused to issue any a permits to anyone, and still continue to refuse to for going on eight years now. The state even denied him the use of his federal evidence in his case. The state court of appeals overturned it citing South Dakota Mining vs Lawrence County, No. 97-3861, September 16th 1998, 8th Court of Appeals.

“The ordinance's de facto ban on mining on federal land acts as a clear obstacle to the accomplishment of the Congressional purposes and objectives embodied in the Mining Act. Congress has encouraged exploration and mining of valuable mineral deposits located on federal land and has granted certain rights to those who discover such minerals.   Federal law also encourages the economical extraction and use of these minerals… To do so offends both the Property Clause and the Supremacy Clause of the federal Constitution. The ordinance is prohibitory, not regulatory, in its fundamental character.”

Political pressure was brought to bear and the case was quickly overturned in the state’s Supreme Court. In that case the Obama administration directed the Department of Justice to step in on the case and unconstitutionally endorsed the denial of Mr. Rinehart’s federal mining rights. The Pacific Legal Foundation has petitioned the case to the US Supreme Court.

Please Mr. President, we ask that you not only have the Department of Justice rescind its opinion in this case but reverse it and support Mr. Rinehart’s federal rights. Please contact Mr. Jonathan Wood, Environmental Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation for any assistance you may need. https://www.pacificlegal.org/cases/California-claim-jumps-the-rights-of-miners-on-federal-land

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Terry Soloman]

...Terry,
I don't care about the big mining companies, I care about my claims and my voice and PLF is a large law firm taking this case pro bono. This is a positive action I took today speaking my voice to the Pres and the DOJ. I have done something.

So you just side step my question because you don't have an answer, and fool yourself into believing you have "done something." Sigh...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Goldwasher]

Big mining uses small mining for exploration. I don't see how they've turned their backs really.
Mining is mining in mining areas that are mined.

There are big guys little guys guys that climb on rocks.

there are a lot more other mines than there are gold mines. the rocks fly daily. there are a serious amount of small outfits putting out big pay.

Are there not?

The problem is one tool is being focused on. It happens to mainly be used "part time" for most of those users. Heck they even try to put you over a barrell
for maybe even enjoying it.

Hell, they even want to call other things a suction dredge for funzies. Why not let them.

Even the largest "commercial" dredges operating in the river in the '80's were some dudes running big dredges.
This isn't big minings fight. They still have field geologists.

They could offer advice like "follow the law" "have a lawyer" "have lot's of money"

shoot seems like if we listen to "the most experienced"

we should just give up, stop creating the problem, do it better, etc.

Ratled thanks for the countless hours you put in to help scam people. SMH

Keep doing what your doing I'll be shaking your hand sooner hopefully rather than later

 

[Laz7777]

I've looked at the "study" done after SB670 went into effect, and it talks mainly about the erosional properties of dredging, and significantly states, "No rigorous studies have been performed to document the effects of dredge campsite development and use on water quality."
of course, once the "moratorium" went into place, no studies could be done without dredging being active. you cannot study the effect without allowing the cause.
there has been no legal argument on the environmental impact study, with it's flawed conclusion.

I believe the legal course that this has followed (Rhinehart) is the wrong tactic. using the 1872 Mining Rights Act is akin to fighting a modern war with flintlock muskets.

MAKE the state of California prove the toxicology argument.

the Rhinehart case and petioning president Trump and the DOJ has been a wasted effort and will be a further diversion of the issue.

 

[ratled]

you cannot study the effect without allowing the cause.
there has been no legal argument on the environmental impact study, with it's flawed conclusion.
MAKE the state of California prove the toxicology argument.

Ummm there is a little thing called the CEQA case before Judge Ochoa as part of the consolidated cases. Expecting to get fair shake in the California courts is a joke. We have a term called "getting Ochoa'ed" where you want to do the right thing but your bosses explain company policy as it is going to be actually carried out. Oh wait, perhaps federal court where it will quickly go to the 9th where you hope to have a civil case on state law picked up by the US Supreme Court. Or do you have another plan to "force them to prove it" and expect them not use the junk science they used to get to this point in first place.

THIS is why a criminal case based on federal rights has PLF feeling this is the best course of action to resolve this.... and they only take cases that are high percentage winners... and the courts know this

So please, for those that just want to get back to mining please send in a letter on behalf of Brandon.

ratled

 

[Laz7777]

this case needs to fought in California, my take on this is the case will be rejected by the higher courts and let to rest on earlier decisions.
not to put anyones' efforts down, but like protesting, I believe petitions are merely a balm. if it makes you feel good, well, there's something.

the Prez needs to stop micro-managing and get on with something other than what he's been doing. the nation is owed something more than petty involvement by Trump and his cabinet.

the major issue needs to be the environment. not a side issue grouped with all other issues. it will be the only way this will move one way or the other.
Rinehart will likely not be heard any further, just my opinion.

 

[ratled]

this case needs to fought in California

It has been on the books for over a year for SB 637 and we are at 8 years for the "temporary moratorium", who do you propose will make them prove this? How will it be paid for, what is different from the current civil cases and Rinehart that was already struck down by the CA Supreme Court that says it is ok? Who are you waiting for to do this on your behalf?

ratled

 

[Bejay]

So you just side step my question because you don't have an answer, and fool yourself into believing you have "done something." Sigh...

Personally Terry I fail to understand why anyone is wasting their time responding to you about the Rhinehart case. But There is nothing stopping you from pursuing any tactic you deem prudent...GO FOR IT!

EACH AND EVERY MINER CAN DO WHAT THEY THINK IS BEST....contribute or sit back and watch others do what they can! Instant success is seldom achieved through the courts....as it is a process that tends to be never ending at times!

Bejay

 

[goldenIrishman]

Personally Terry I fail to understand why anyone is wasting their time responding to you about the Rhinehart case. But There is nothing stopping you from pursuing any tactic you deem prudent...GO FOR IT!

EACH AND EVERY MINER CAN DO WHAT THEY THINK IS BEST....contribute or sit back and watch others do what they can! Instant success is seldom achieved through the courts....as it is a process that tends to be never ending at times!

Bejay

yep...... For EVERY decision that the courts come up with, there will be a half dozen groups that will disagree with it and keep dragging it back to the courts. That's the unfortunate truth about humans and a court system designed by them. (Look at Roe V Wade and how many times that's come back up even after the Supreme Court ruled on it)

 

[ratled]

Giving this one bump. New weekly letter tomorrow

THANKS to everyone for their support!!!


ratled

 

[Sam_at_Armadillo]

Giving this one bump. New weekly letter tomorrow

THANKS to everyone for their support!!!


ratled

Good Morning!
Do we have a theme this week?
I am not the best writer but I am dedicated to these letters.
Badly written or not.
Thanks!
Sam

 

[ratled]

Good Morning!
Do we have a theme this week?
I am not the best writer but I am dedicated to these letters.
Badly written or not.
Thanks!
Sam

Tomorrow's theme is the Pebble mine in Alaska. Rep Smith out of Texas and House Science Committee Chair wrote EPA Administrator Pruitt to undo the extraordinary action it took against the Pebble Mine citing it's over reach of the EPA authority and was "justified" via junk science.
http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/gold-prospecting/532402-house-urges-epa-rescind-veto-alaskan-mine-despite-local-opposition.html

I'll put it up today as it is ready to go. I just need to do the intro so everyone knows it really is. I really don't understand why the FBI isn't conducting a RICO case on it !

ratled

 

[enamel7]

this case needs to fought in California, my take on this is the case will be rejected by the higher courts and let to rest on earlier decisions.
not to put anyones' efforts down, but like protesting, I believe petitions are merely a balm. if it makes you feel good, well, there's something.

the Prez needs to stop micro-managing and get on with something other than what he's been doing. the nation is owed something more than petty involvement by Trump and his cabinet.

the major issue needs to be the environment. not a side issue grouped with all other issues. it will be the only way this will move one way or the other.
Rinehart will likely not be heard any further, just my opinion.

Wrong. If the case had been won in the state then Cali would have turned around the next day and rewrote everything to cover their arses. Supreme court means federal law can't be ignored like the state has done. Seeing as the SC has agreed to hear arguments and previously ruled dredging wasn't adding pollution to the water actually should prove a win. They aren't gonna just refuse to hear the case. Times are changing back to normal and hopefully all of the PC crap will go the way of the dinosaur.
I keep hearing about public sentiment. Public sentiment had nothing to do with the moratorium. That was simply done by dirty politicians getting their palms greased!

 

[ratled]

THIS is why I think we stand a chance for the Rinehart request! You can still send in a letter, or second, on behalf of Brandon

ratled

Sessions asks 46 Obama-era US attorneys to resign | TheHill

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has asked dozens of U.S. attorneys appointed by former President Obama to submit their resignations, the Department of Justice announced Friday.

U.S. attorneys are normally replaced at the beginning of new administrations. Of the 93 U.S. attorneys, 46 remain from the past administration, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Sessions asked for the federal prosecutors to resign "in order to ensure a uniform transition," DOJ spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said in a statement.
“As was the case in prior transitions, many of the United States Attorneys nominated by the previous administration already have left the Department of Justice," the spokeswoman said.

The DOJ said career prosecutors in Sessions' office would continue investigations and prosecutions until the new U.S. attorneys are confirmed.



Sessions asks 46 Obama-era US attorneys to resign

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has asked dozens of U.S. attorneys appointed by former President Obama to submit their resignations, the Department of Justice announced Friday.

U.S. attorneys are normally replaced at the beginning of new administrations. Of the 93 U.S. attorneys, 46 remain from the past administration, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Sessions asked for the federal prosecutors to resign "in order to ensure a uniform transition," DOJ spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said in a statement.
“As was the case in prior transitions, many of the United States Attorneys nominated by the previous administration already have left the Department of Justice," the spokeswoman said.

The DOJ said career prosecutors in Sessions' office would continue investigations and prosecutions until the new U.S. attorneys are confirmed.