Investigative Journalist Barry R. Clausen
October 23, 2011
It should be noted that every Republican leader in Sacramento has received stories from numerous news sources about Nielsen’s fraudulent activities and all have refused to respond or comment. Even though every office was personally contacted at the State Capitol by a Mirror reporter none would comment for any story involving Nielsen.
For over three years the Sacramento Valley Mirror has published stories about Assemblyman Jim Nielsen and the issue of his “residence” vs. “domicile.” Nielsen claims he lives in a trailer in Gerber California (residence) when in fact he lives in a million dollar home in Woodland (domicile). The trailer is in the 2nd Assembly District and the Woodland home is not.
On April 9, 2008 Nielsen stated publically for the record in the Mount Shasta Herald that he did not live in Gerber. He also stated for the record in the same article that because he was going to give up his $1 million home in Woodland and move into the trailer in Gerber it was acceptable for him to file for office in a district where he does not live. California laws state that a person running for state office must live in a domicile in the district she/he runs in.
A pain in the backside for Nielsen has been long time activist and former U.S. Marine, 76 year old Don Bird. Bird who has picketed Nielsen for the entire three years he has been in office and made threats to make a citizen’s arrest on the Assemblyman for his illegal actions. Bird’s protests have been met with a request for a restraining order against him by both Jim Nielsen and Nielsen’s wife Marilyn.
County court documents which were signed under penalty of perjury clearly show extremely creative writing on behalf of the Nielsens. Yet those responsible for enforcing the laws ignore Nielsen’s illegal activities. This includes California Attorney General Kamala D. Harris and Governor Jerry Brown who both ignored Nielsen’s illegal activities. Gregg Cohen the Tehama County Prosecuting Attorney also did nothing because as he stated, “I can’t, I endorsed him.” As the County Prosecutor it is his responsibility to order a local investigation into criminal activities and prosecute those who commit the crimes in his county.
The October 21, 2011 court hearing held to address the matter of the restraining order, “Nielsen, Jim W. vs. Bird, Donald” commenced in the Tehama County Superior Court, Department 3 in Red Bluff, CA..
There are usually two to three Sheriff Deputies posted just inside of the Tehama County Superior Court building charged with sheepherding citizens through the now familiar security process that allows them entry into the three courtrooms housed there. On this day, there were six Deputies. While speaking to a fellow Deputy, one explained to the other that, “They (Nielsen’s attorneys) asked for the proceedings to be moved downstairs for security.”
Supporters from both sides arrived, went through the security screening and waited for the courtroom to be unlocked so they could find seats for the show. Mr. and Mrs. Nielsen arrived but instead of going through the standard entry process, were diverted to another entryway.
At 8:55 a.m. participants and observers were allowed into the courtroom to witness the proceedings. At 9:00 a.m. Nielsen and his wife entered the courtroom via a side “Staff Only” door located inside the restricted area of the court room usually reserved for judges and court officials. The case itself was dispatched in a mere seven minutes.
At 9:03 a.m. Judge Richard Scheuler called the proceedings to order and announced that from the conversation(s) he had heard in his chambers that he believed there was “…a possible resolution of Case CI65575, Nielsen V Bird.” When he then polled Nielsen’s and Bird’s attorneys on that question, both answered in the affirmative that there was indeed a resolution agreed upon by both parties.
Judge Scheuler then requested that the agreed to amendment and the agreed to stipulations of the original Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) be filed with the court at that time. This was immediately done. Before Scheuler signed the judgment, he again asked Bird and Nielsen if they understood and agreed to the amendment and stipulations to which they both responded “Yes.” Bird’s only request was that the stipulations be read in open court.
The four stipulations are; one, for the next three (3) years, Don Bird will not try to or threaten to place Jim Nielsen under citizen’s arrest; two, for the next three (3) years, Bird will not enter or attempt to enter Nielsen’s home or property; three, the Defendant (Bird) does not have to surrender his guns; and four, each (party) will carry their own attorney’s fees. Scheuler then adjourned the court at 9:10 a.m.
In spite of the fact that Judge Scheuler had explained before he signed the judgment at 9:07 a.m. that, “The sole terms of the judgment are contained in the judgment,” (in other words, no other issues, perceptions or facts were being decided or ruled upon at that time) David Reade, Nielsen’s Chief of Staff immediately began spinning the story by making statements to the press that Bird had admitted to “stalking” Nielsen in court documents. That was not the case however. “Stalking” was not addressed nor stipulated to.
An unidentified blonde woman dressed in black was overheard speaking to Reade, outside the courthouse. Her statement, “This is not over. I have a few more surprises.” It is unknown what she meant by that.
A Valley Mirror reporter waited with camera in hand for Nielsen and his wife to depart the courthouse. It was not until the reporter went to check another entry that Nielsen and his wife, flanked by three Tehama County Sheriff Deputies, fled the area into a waiting white State SUV with the State Capitol Sergeant at Arms present and were whisked away.
One of the witnesses
scheduled to appear in court against Bird was Corning Observer
reporter Julie Johnson. As most believe Johnson’s October 4th story
about Activist Don Bird was anything but fair reporting and it made many
wonder why she felt the need to write the hit piece on the elderly former
Marine. Feffery D. Lim an attorney from the Torrance, California Law firm
of Hager & Dowling was present at the current court hearing to represent
Johnson and the Observer. As it turned out, neither one was used
Following the October 21st court hearing Johnson called Bird and asked for another interview. Bird refused.
David Reade was also present at the courthouse and was successful in avoiding having his picture taken. Reade fed members of the press, the official Nielsen’s office spin that the court appearance showed that Bird was guilty of “stalking Nielsen” and that information would be in a press release from Nielsen’s office later that day.
Reade also told Juliet Williams of the Associated Press that, “… Nielsen lives in Gerber. That's where their home is; it's where it always has been," Reade said. "At every point along the way that Mr. Bird has made his false accusation and attempted to adjudicate it, he has been rebuffed by the court. Bird, a former Marine and contractor who lives in Rancho Tehama, has been making his claim since before Nielsen's election to the Assembly in 2008.”
What is interesting about the AP story is that Williams just took Reade’s word on the residency issue and appears to have written her story from the inaccurate Nielsen press release without checking how accurate those statements were. The blatant misinformation on this issue keeps coming from Nielsen’s staff. As a reporter I did the first story on Nielsen’s residency and he did not live in Gerber for the first two years during his term as a CA State Assemblyman.
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
Even though the AP and numerous papers ran the inaccurate Reade version of what transpired in court Bird stated, “I’m one happy camper. I won. It’s not over yet, this is not my victory it belongs to everyone…. “
Charlie Schaupp of Esparto, CA attended the court hearing. Following court Schaupp stated, “To me Jim Nielsen basically had to drop his restraining order against Bird because Nielsen knows the truth. He did not want witnesses on the stand testifying that he did not live in the Gerber trailer. Nielsen is a black eye and an embarrassment to the Republican Party and everyone knows he did not live in the trailer.”
© 2011 Barry R. Clausen - All Rights Reserved
Mr. Clausen has been a guest on over 250 U.S. and Canadian radio talk shows and TV news shows including ABC, CBS, NBC and repeatedly on FOX News. He has been featured or quoted in over 800 books, magazines and news articles including the San Francisco Chronicle, Washington Post, Vancouver Province, Canada’s B.C. Report, New York Times, Newsday, Seattle Times, Oregonian, Sacramento Bee, Christian Science Monitor, The Dallas Morning News and a lengthy article beginning on the front page of the Wall Street Journal.
Mr. Clausen’s information has been translated and used by publications in many foreign countries including Japan, Ireland, England, Turkey, Germany, France and Chile. In 1994, a film crew from Danish TV-2 flew to Seattle to interview Mr. Clausen for a television documentary about international and U.S. extremist organizations. The documentary, A MAN IN THE RAINBOW, was subsequently aired in several European countries.
His latest book "Burning Rage - The Growing Anger Within My Country," covers Clausen's personal experiences within the American judicial system, as well as his investigations into the activities of environmental / animal rights terrorists and extremists. Burning Rage is a behind the scenes look at the dark underworld of government cover-ups, the Unabomber, and radical environmentalism. Clausen is a 'human backhoe' - constantly digging for the truth. What he finds is not always pleasant, but sometimes the truth hurts.