Reid Stands by Bundy Remarks: They’re ‘Domestic Violent Terrorist Wannabes’

[Constitutional Paulicy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2pIHbMpfyA


Senator Harry Reid came under fire for saying Thursday that supporters of Cliven Bundy are “domestic terrorists,” and in a TV appearance today he doubled down. He appeared on local Nevada program What’s Your Point? with Dean Heller, Nevada’s other senator, and stood by his remarks, calling Bundy’s supporters “domestic violent terrorist wannabes.”

Reid said that Bundy “doesn’t believe that the American government is valid” and doesn’t follow the law, bringing up how hundreds of people showed up armed to defend Bundy to argue that they’re basically engaging in an act of domestic terrorism.

“600 people came. Armed. They had practice, they had maneuver, they knew what they were doing. They set up snipers in strategic locations with sniper rifles. They had assault weapons. They had automatic weapons… If there ever were an example of people who were domestic violent terrorist wannabes, these are the guys, and I think we should call it that way.”

Heller said, “What Senator Reid may call domestic terrorists, I call patriots.” Reid shot back, “If they’re patriots, we’re in real trouble.”

more here.... http://www.mediaite.com/tv/reid-stands-by-bundy-remarks-theyre-domestic-violent-terrorist-wannabes/

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

I had to raise the volume to listen to this video because Reid's voice was too low and raspy from sucking on old man cock

[Anti Federalist]

Fuck You Harry.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Reid is the terrorist. He supports urban development and then shrewdly transfers the ecological and other fallout to rural dwellers in adjacent areas. The latest euphemism is "secondary mitigation." Reid and his minions, for example, expect rural dwellers to help create, renew, or replenish water sources that were taken in urban development.

The rural dwellers object to this transfer of responsibility and Reid supports sending in his troops. They rough up women and pregnant women. That is the very epitome of terrorism.

[Weston White]

“If they’re patriots, we’re in real trouble.” ...Well at least he finally got one thing correct in his long pointless political career.

Apropos, I feel that if Mr. Reid truly believes what he is peddling, with all this talk about domestic terrorism, then he should be brought up on inciting domestic terrorism charges. Rather than trying to tactfully reason the present issue, he is belittling, denigrating, or otherwise trivializing the very real concerns of the very people he considers to be so very dangerous. When standing beneath a towering tree one should take caution to not begin whacking hornet’s nests. A statesman Mr. Reid is certainly not.

[LibertyEagle]

Notice how when he calls the land "federal land", that he points his hands at himself, like he owns the **&**(( land. Dear God, I hate that POS.

[LibertyEagle]

//

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Notice how when he calls the land "federal land", that he points his hands at himself, like he owns the **&**(( land. Dear God, I hate that POS.

I did not catch that. It really is very telling and pretty much says it all.

If anybody can stomach watching, it's the last few seconds of the video.

[squarepusher]

I have a difficult time getting behind a multimillionaire rancher (Cliven Bundy) who inherited a lot of his wealth, as well as getting wealth through Federal Subsidies not only through massive government agriculture programs, but grazing and water use of public lands, which in fact he stopped paying all together. So in fact he is like a welfare queen who is mad that they aren't getting enough free things, had his day in court and lost and now refuses to comply at the barrel of his gun to the legal order. That seems like the opposite of Libertarian principles to me ...

In addition, he put all those men, women and children's safety at risk to protect his fortune, for his greed, who largely thought they were doing the right thing and standing up for a cause and freedom. Yes, the BLM agents showed up armed, but they are just enforcing the multiple court orders that we in a civilized society strive to live by (rules and laws). Bundy needs to take his issues to court if he thinks he has a real legal standing, essentially he is stealing with the literal barrel of his gun.

If you really want to get behind Cliven Bundy, then you have to say the Federal Government doesn't exist, so we live in anarchy and is that really what people around here think? If you have ever voted for Ron Paul or a liberty candidate, then you have to admit to the system and you are trying to change it. This situation is just anarchy. Look what happened to Wesley Snipes when he went to jail over not paying his taxes, do the oath keepers and Cliven support him?
http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/19/wesley-snipes-ordered-to-jail-on-tax-charges/

[LibertyEagle]

I have a difficult time getting behind a multimillionaire rancher (Cliven Bundy) who inherited a lot of his wealth,

WTF is wrong with someone inheriting wealth? I have to tell you that when someone says something negative about someone inheriting money, that it smacks a lot of jealousy. By the way, that is how farming/ranching has been pretty much since it first started. Land and equipment are handed down and the next generation continues farming/ranching on that land. While many used to have a high net worth because of the land and equipment they owned, they actually lived pretty meagerly. The land and equipment were tools of their trade.

[LibForestPaul]

Wonder who put Harry in the Senate? Oh, wait for it, the peoples of Nevada. Reap what you sow bitches.

[euphemia]

Harry Reid has rewritten the book on low-class and tacky corruption.

[belian78]

Square, how can you be a member of this site since 08 and have an opinion like that? You're mad because he inherited 14hr days? Because he inherited day after day of backbreaking work? It's not all sunshine and lolipops kid, Cliven works his ass of everyday maintaining that land and his herd and his ranch. THAT is why he and others are fighting back. Not to protect an inheritance. I am disappointed, for real.

[pcosmar]

“If they’re patriots, we’re in real trouble.”

Yes,, they are.
and yes,, you are.

:mad:

And there are a lot more of them than you know.

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

Terrorists like to kill people and take hostages, am I right?

...and no one is after Mr. Reid? He sleeps peacefully in his bed at night beside his wife, does he not?

Methinks he is using inflammatory statements in order to control the debate. We can say what we like here, we can discuss and debate; so long as the folks gathered around the Bundy ranch continue to barbecue and camp out without killing people or taking hostages, they are not terrorists.

It's really a shame that so many Americans do not understand the rights the Constitution safeguards for them. If more people did, however, Reid wouldn't have time to make his inflammatory statements.

Patriots really do like their rights, and that includes the right Reid has to say stupid shit. Patriots will not deprive a man of life or liberty without due process. No one is advocating violence, save Reid. I say that makes him the domestic terrorist.

[muh_roads]

This is why I made my thread the other day.

So Harry is lying here when he says it is Federal land? Why isn't anyone debating him calling him out on that if it is Nevada land? Why isn't anyone calling out that the BLM was formed AFTER Nevada already had rights to the land? They picked the worst guy to debate Reid on this by design.

Hell lets take it a step further and say the Native Americans actually own the land before any of us got here.

Those simple questions are not being injected into any debate I watch. If the above is true, it needs to be hammered over and over again.

[aGameOfThrones]

I have a difficult time getting behind a multimillionaire rancher (Cliven Bundy) who inherited a lot of his wealth, as well as getting wealth through Federal Subsidies not only through massive government agriculture programs, but grazing and water use of public lands, which in fact he stopped paying all together. So in fact he is like a welfare queen who is mad that they aren't getting enough free things, had his day in court and lost and now refuses to comply at the barrel of his gun to the legal order. That seems like the opposite of Libertarian principles to me ...

In addition, he put all those men, women and children's safety at risk to protect his fortune, for his greed, who largely thought they were doing the right thing and standing up for a cause and freedom. Yes, the BLM agents showed up armed, but they are just enforcing the multiple court orders that we in a civilized society strive to live by (rules and laws). Bundy needs to take his issues to court if he thinks he has a real legal standing, essentially he is stealing with the literal barrel of his gun.

If you really want to get behind Cliven Bundy, then you have to say the Federal Government doesn't exist, so we live in anarchy and is that really what people around here think? If you have ever voted for Ron Paul or a liberty candidate, then you have to admit to the system and you are trying to change it. This situation is just anarchy. Look what happened to Wesley Snipes when he went to jail over not paying his taxes, do the oath keepers and Cliven support him?
http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/19/wesley-snipes-ordered-to-jail-on-tax-charges/

http://replygif.net/i/735.gif

[kcchiefs6465]

This is why I made my thread the other day.

So Harry is lying here when he says it is Federal land? Why isn't anyone debating him calling him out on that if it is Nevada land? Why isn't anyone calling out that the BLM was formed AFTER Nevada already had rights to the land? They picked the worst guy to debate Reid on this by design.
Harry Reid is a collectivist authoritarian here. He isn't so much as lying as he is advocating fascist policy. He is dead set that the Federal Government owns the land. They. do. not. Period. But even with all of the evidence he does not care. None of them do. They'll shoot down those who cannot otherwise be imprisoned or fined into compliance. Compliance of their non-law and bureaucratically enacted decrees, that is.

Everyone is calling him out on it. How does the Federal Government own 90% of Nevada? How does it own 48% of Arizona? They don't. They don't own any land absent military bases and Washington DC and even then, the ownership is not that of the government. It is of the people's. It's my goddamn Fort, after-all am I not robbed weekly to pay for it? This while the ticks of DC develop intricate means to avoid taxes while simultaneously digging my pockets for every cent they can discover?

Why isn't anyone calling out that 264,000,000 acres of the most valuable land has been squandered by an unconstitutional bureaucracy? Why don't they speak of the corrupt deals in which the Federal bureaucrats were lobbied by barons to have their worthless property dictated part of an ever growing National Park? The Fifth Amendment requires them to be compensated, after all. Well they were purposely given land with value far exceeding the property that was confiscated from them. This is aside from their schemes of acquiring thousands of acres, building their property, having the surrounding area labeled Federal Land and prohibiting anyone else from building or living there.

Oh wait, they have.



Hell lets take it a step further and say the Native Americans actually own the land before any of us got here.

They did. What, because the establishment of our government, we had some right to murder or dispel those already here? What happened to the American Indians was a shame. I'm not quite sure what you are getting at. (hopefully not anything along the lines of what squarepusher was getting at)



Those simple questions are not being injected into any debate I watch. If the above is true, it needs to be hammered over and over again.
What right does the Federal Government have to control 90% of Nevada's land? It isn't a matter of "if." I don't care how many people in this country think otherwise.

[Anti Federalist]

That's so upside down I don't even know where to start.

ETA -


"There have been a lot of people criticizing Clive Bundy because he did not pay his grazing fees for 20 years. The public is also probably wondering why so many other cowboys are supporting Mr. Bundy even though they paid their fees and Clive did not. What you people probably do not realize is that on every rancher's grazing permit it says the following: "You are authorized to make grazing use of the lands, under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management and covered by this grazing permit, upon your acceptance of the terms and conditions of this grazing permit and payment of grazing fees when due." The "mandatory" terms and conditions go on to list the allotment, the number and kind of livestock to be grazed, when the permit begins and ends, the number of active or suspended AUMs (animal units per month), etc. The terms and conditions also list specific requirements such as where salt or mineral supplements can be located, maximum allowable use of forage levels (40% of annual growth), etc., and include a lot more stringent policies that must be adhered to. Every rancher must sign this "contract" agreeing to abide by the TERMS AND CONDITIONS before he or she can make payment. In the early 90s, the BLM went on a frenzy and drastically cut almost every rancher's permit because of this desert tortoise issue, even though all of us ranchers knew that cow and desert tortoise had co-existed for a hundred+ years. As an example, a family friend had his permit cut by 90%. For those of you who are non ranchers, that would be equated to getting your paycheck cut 90%. In 1976 there were approximately 52 ranching permittees in this area of Nevada. Presently, there are 3. Most of these people lost their livelihoods because of the actions of the BLM. Clive Bundy was one of these people who received extremely unfair and unreasonable TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

Keep in mind that Mr. Bundy was required to sign this contract before he was allowed to pay. Had Clive signed on the dotted line, he would have, in essence, signed his very livelihood away. And so Mr. Bundy took a stand, not only for himself, but for all of us. He refused to be destroyed by a tyrannical federal entity and to have his American liberties and freedoms taken away. Also keep in mind that all ranchers financially paid dearly for the forage rights those permits allow - - not rights to the land, but rights to use the forage that grows on that land. Many of these AUMS are water based, meaning that the rancher also has a vested right (state owned, not federal) to the waters that adjoin the lands and allow the livestock to drink. These water rights were also purchased at a great price. If a rancher cannot show beneficial use of the water (he must have the appropriate number of livestock that drinks and uses that water), then he loses that water right. Usually water rights and forage rights go hand in hand. Contrary to what the BLM is telling you, they NEVER compensate a rancher for the AUMs they take away. Most times, they tell ranchers that their AUMS are "suspended," but not removed. Unfortunately, my family has thousands of "suspended" AUMs that will probably never be returned. And so, even though these ranchers throughout the course of a hundred years invested thousands(and perhaps millions) of dollars and sacrificed along the way to obtain these rights through purchase from others, at a whim the government can take everything away with the stroke of a pen. This is the very thing that Clive Bundy single handedly took a stand against. Thank you, Clive, from a rancher who considers you a hero."


I have a difficult time getting behind a multimillionaire rancher (Cliven Bundy) who inherited a lot of his wealth, as well as getting wealth through Federal Subsidies not only through massive government agriculture programs, but grazing and water use of public lands, which in fact he stopped paying all together. So in fact he is like a welfare queen who is mad that they aren't getting enough free things, had his day in court and lost and now refuses to comply at the barrel of his gun to the legal order. That seems like the opposite of Libertarian principles to me ...

In addition, he put all those men, women and children's safety at risk to protect his fortune, for his greed, who largely thought they were doing the right thing and standing up for a cause and freedom. Yes, the BLM agents showed up armed, but they are just enforcing the multiple court orders that we in a civilized society strive to live by (rules and laws). Bundy needs to take his issues to court if he thinks he has a real legal standing, essentially he is stealing with the literal barrel of his gun.

If you really want to get behind Cliven Bundy, then you have to say the Federal Government doesn't exist, so we live in anarchy and is that really what people around here think? If you have ever voted for Ron Paul or a liberty candidate, then you have to admit to the system and you are trying to change it. This situation is just anarchy. Look what happened to Wesley Snipes when he went to jail over not paying his taxes, do the oath keepers and Cliven support him?
http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/19/wesley-snipes-ordered-to-jail-on-tax-charges/

[Anti Federalist]

In addition, he put all those men, women and children's safety at risk to protect his fortune, for his greed, who largely thought they were doing the right thing and standing up for a cause and freedom. Yes, the BLM agents showed up armed, but they are just enforcing the multiple court orders that we in a civilized society strive to live by (rules and laws). Bundy needs to take his issues to court if he thinks he has a real legal standing, essentially he is stealing with the literal barrel of his gun.

King's Land, King's Grant, King's Court...c'mon, you're just trolling now.

So, who is the "perfect" victim of government oppression that "we" should coalesce around?

[kcchiefs6465]

King's Land, King's Grant, King's Court...c'mon, you're just trolling now.

So, who is the "perfect" victim of government oppression that "we" should coalesce around?
Wesley Snipes.

[aGameOfThrones]

Wesley Snipes.

Let's wait and see how he does in the Expendables 3.

[AuH20]

Wesley Snipes.

I don't think he even asked for help. Hell, he's never even said anything publicly or joined an anti-tax organization. It's hard to help people who won't help themselves.

[kcchiefs6465]

I don't think he even asked for help. Hell, he's never even said anything publicly or joined an anti-tax organization. It's hard to help people who won't help themselves.

Wesley Snipes Freed--Tax Lessons Remain

Wesley Snipes is out of prison. TMZ broke the story that the Federal Bureau of Prisons quietly released him April 2. He’s not in the wind, though, but was transferred to the New York Community Corrections Office for home confinement until July 19th. Death and Taxes has photos of the halfway house. See Wesley Snipes released from prison, under house arrest.

What a ride it’s been, starting in 2006. Mr. Snipes was convicted of three misdemeanor counts of failing to file tax returns in 2008. Sentenced to McKean Federal Correctional Institution, a medium-security prison in Pennsylvania, he reported December 9, 2010. He finished at the adjacent prison camp, a minimum security Club Fed as inmate number 43355-018.

During 1999 through 2001, Snipes avoided $7 million in taxes but I’ll bet he would have paid it willingly had he known what was coming. Whatever you may think of Mr. Snipes, it seems clear he was led astray. Snipes followed an accountant and an anti-tax advocate down a dangerous path, but it was still his responsibility.

The advisers claimed they did not legally have to pay taxes. One of Snipes’ original defenses was that he was relying on Eddie Ray Kahn and Douglas P. Rosile. They were convicted by the same jury of tax fraud and conspiracy and both got longer prison terms than Mr. Snipes. Still, Snipes must have been surprised by the trial, which was shorter than anticipated.

Snipes was such a well-known figure and high earner—about $40 million from 1999 to 2004—that not paying taxes was hard to fathom. The big victory for Snipes was that he was acquitted of felony tax fraud and conspiracy and only convicted of misdemeanor charges. See Wesley Snipes Turns 50 In Prison But Didn’t File False Tax Return. But that meant up to 3 years, which he got.

Snipes appealed, argued his sentence was unreasonable, and even claimed he couldn’t get a fair trial in Ocala, Florida because of his race. Even the U.S. Supreme Court turned him down. Post prison, I imagine Mr. Snipes might dispense the following advice, though these are my assumptions, not his words:

Don’t Argue Our Tax System is Voluntary. This is self-explanatory. Forget it.

Don’t Use Off-beat Definitions of Income. Don’t argue wages, tips, and other compensation received for personal services are not income. Avoid saying Federal Reserve Notes are not income or that only foreign-source income is taxable, making domestic income exempt. This has variations, but this is what ensnared Mr. Snipes.

Don’t Argue Over Terms in the Tax Code. Avoid arguing that a taxpayer is not a “citizen” of the U.S. and thus not subject to tax laws. Avoid claiming the U.S. consists only of the District of Columbia, federal territories, and federal enclaves. Don’t argue that only employees of the federal government are subject to federal income tax.

Steer Clear of Constitutional Claims. Arguments based on the First, Fifth, Thirteenth and Sixteenth Amendments to our Constitution include such “nice try” claims as: Taxpayers can refuse to pay income taxes on religious or moral grounds by invoking the First Amendment; Federal income taxes constitute a “taking” without due process; and compelled compliance with federal income tax laws is servitude violating the Thirteenth Amendment.

Don’t Assert Fictional Legal Theories. Avoid these “fictional” claims: The IRS is not an agency of the U.S. (You lose.) Taxpayers are not required to file a federal income tax return because the instructions to Form 1040 and tax regulations don’t display an OMB control number as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. (No again.) Don’t claim you’re a church. Don’t buy “untaxing” trusts or other deals that sound like infomercials.

Be Careful Relying on Others. This may be the most important lesson of all. If something sounds too good to be true, it may be. Stay free, Wesley.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2013/04/05/wesley-snipes-freed-tax-lessons-remain/




[....]

Snipes had been paying millions in federal income taxes when, according to prosecutors, he accepted the arguments of his two co-defendants, an accountant and an anti-tax ideologue. In lengthy filings to the IRS, the three defendants claimed they did not legally have to pay taxes, citing an obscure section of the tax code that establishes that foreign sources of income for U.S. citizens are taxable.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2013/04/05/wesley-snipes-finishes-jail-time-for-tax-evasion/2057455/


Wesley Snipes would have taken all of the help he could have gotten. Generally speaking, your speech is restricted during the trial process. He couldn't come out and say what he may have wanted to for fear that the maximum sentence would have been handed to him. And as well, it is clear he doesn't much care for being robbed.

[IronPatriot]

Wonder who put Harry in the Senate? Oh, wait for it, the peoples of Nevada. Reap what you sow bitches.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2620865/posts

[fr33]

Wonder who put Harry in the Senate? Oh, wait for it, the peoples of Nevada. Reap what you sow bitches.

Goddammit are you going to blame me for Mac Thornberry or John Cornyn if and when I get steamrolled over? I didn't vote for him. Do you think Cliven Bundy voted for Reid?

[euphemia]

Maybe Reid should stand by the militia when he says that.

[fr33]

I have a difficult time getting behind a multimillionaire rancher (Cliven Bundy) who inherited a lot of his wealth, as well as getting wealth through Federal Subsidies not only through massive government agriculture programs, but grazing and water use of public lands, which in fact he stopped paying all together. So in fact he is like a welfare queen who is mad that they aren't getting enough free things, had his day in court and lost and now refuses to comply at the barrel of his gun to the legal order. That seems like the opposite of Libertarian principles to me ...

I challenge you to refuse your heirs their inheritance in your will. I challenge you to make a living as a rancher without being a "multimillionaire". And if you live in a city, I challenge you to stop using the subsidy that your local government provides to steal water from other people and their lands. As usual, most "principled" libertarians are just as hypocritical as the people they criticize.

[IronPatriot]

Goddammit are you going to blame me for Mac Thornberry or John Cornyn if and when I get steamrolled over? I didn't vote for him. Do you think Cliven Bundy voted for Reid?

Thank you!

[satchelmcqueen]

according to reid i am a terrorist to. well, i have been ever since the patriot act i suppose.

[phill4paul]

King's Land, King's Grant, King's Court...c'mon, you're just trolling now.

So, who is the "perfect" victim of government oppression that "we" should coalesce around?

Just another idiot that played his card on RPF.

He did it to himself.

[squarepusher]

I challenge you to refuse your heirs their inheritance in your will. I challenge you to make a living as a rancher without being a "multimillionaire". And if you live in a city, I challenge you to stop using the subsidy that your local government provides to steal water from other people and their lands. As usual, most "principled" libertarians are just as hypocritical as the people they criticize.

I have no problem with inheritance, or think worse of people who do so or of people who have money or do not. However in this case, its not just that he has wealth, its that he refuses to pay the already subsidized rate to graze his cattle, use water, shit on lands, claiming in his argument "he doesn't recognize the federal government," when in fact he is a multimillionaire rancher who has profited from federal subsidies greatly (any farmer or livestock ranchers do so in America). Its something like $1.50 per mother/calf pair per month, which is insanely cheap, and I guarantee he does not work 14 hours days, he most likely has illegal immigrants doing most of the heavy/hard work for him. He lost 2 court cases in federal court (assuming at this point when he fought the cases legally he did recognize the federal government), then loses the case and all of a sudden "doesn't recognize the federal government," and hes gunna use their property on the barrel of his gun. This is libertarianism at its worst, someone who fails in his channels the peaceful way then resorts to violence.

I'm gunna bring my cows over to you all your yards who disagree with me, and graze in your backyards, eat your vegetation, drink you water, shit on your land, then if you claim "property rights/trespassing" I will simply claim to not recognize your property. Sound pretty douchy? He is violating the laws of the will of the people.

Ronald Reagan put into law this about grazing fees:
Executive Order 12548 -- Grazing Fees
February 14, 1986

So these laws that Bundy are fighting (or he simply is at the point of not even acknowledging them or the federal government) were put into place by "conservative hero" Ronald Reagan. So my point is, it is not a Libertarian position to have to support Clive Bundy at all, some will choose to and these will be the extremists who don't recognize the federal government at all. Wouldn't it be convenient if any time someone was violating a federal law they could simply say "I don't recognize your authority!!1" and be off scott free? This is nothing even close to resembling the American Revolution either, since Cliven and his "militia" crew are about 500 strong who claim to not recognize the federal government, they would absolutely be crushed if they wanted to take this to a trade of force as the feds really did consider them a "foreign invader/terrorist." The feds could literally blow up his entire ranch with not even leaving their computer with drone strikes, so its a pretty stupid fight if he wants to take it to force, like a real revolution in 1776, so basically his only strategy is to try to "garner sympathy" with the American public, I guess that's what the whole "women and children" strategy was - a PR move, and thats what this whole thing is, which is why it is despicable to put the lives of these innocent Oathkeepers, and people helping him using their lives as a way to get public attention. On the sympathy note, which is all this is, there are plenty of other Americans more deserving of sympathy, like people who literally are in poverty, living 6 to an apartment, who have lost their homes, and the eroding middle class. The graduate with 100k in student loans with no jobs, the list goes on and on ... thats why I think it is ridiculous for this multimillionaire inheritee thousand acre land owner to by crying like a baby over not wanting to pay a few dollars a month to graze his cattle on other peoples land.

So basically if he doesn't recognize the feds as legitimate, that makes him an illegal immigrant and we should deport him with ICE :) Or maybe give his land back to the native americans/mexicans who were there before him?



That being said, I do disagree with the BLM show of force as well, it was very heavy handed, even if they were legally in the right, they didn't grasp the situation well as it is not worth losing human lives over. The Government can simply sit back and take him apart piecemeal by attacking his IRS refund, attaching liens on his bank accounts etc and waiting till he brings the cattle to market and placing a lien on the funds at that time.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I have a difficult time getting behind a multimillionaire rancher (Cliven Bundy)...


I guess we could discuss the difference between land rich and other types of rich, but maybe that would be pointless. I don't know about Mr. Bundy's financial status; however, if he's some kind of very rich, then I'd say he's a fairly shrewd business man.

The Las Vegas Resource Management Plan was published in May 1998. It basically serves as a template for BLM's plan to develop the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone. The first court decision against Bundy was November 1998. I'd say those dates are no coincidence.

The possibly and only shrewd thing about Bundy is that he could have been somewhat ahead of their game. He saw the impending development that would eventually put 52 of his fellow ranchers out of business. If you look at from a purely practical point of view, then Bundy would have been a fool to pay fees to an organization that had no intention of helping his business.

People can talk all day about how these people are freeloaders, and even make claims about how they're living high off the hog. Bundy however, strikes me as another casualty in the perennial battle of urban vs. rural. He is being displaced by urban interests, especially the resourceful energy companies who are simply transferring ecological responsibility from themselves to adjacent areas. The idea that BLM was EVER there to help Bundy or those ranchers "manage" anything is hogwash of the highest degree.






The feds could literally blow up his entire ranch with not even leaving their computer with drone strikes,...


They could blow up his ranch, but this is bigger than Cliven Bundy. It's also much bigger than Harry Reid, Sally Jewell, or any single Chinese company. The entire energy context is far different from Waco or Ruby Ridge.

The energy plan currently envisioned would suffer a quite a setback if Bundy is seriously harmed or killed, and the people at the very highest levels know this. This is not simply about one rancher or one company. The plan under which Bundy falls not only covers Nevada, but also five adjoining states. That is to say nothing of plans for the entire rest of the country.

Those implementing this plan are not going to do themselves any favors with some hothead pressing a button or pulling a trigger. I could be wrong, but I'm guessing there is very serious discussion to isolate Cliven Bundy, possible by some type of contempt charge. Taking him out of the picture that way would be an attempt to defuse a lot of other people. At least for now.

[nobody's_hero]

Bundy's Ranch facebook page has posted several videos of the carnage caused by the BLM and their contract cowboys. Several bull carcasses are strewn across the land, riddled with bullet holes. A few of the watering devices constructed by the bundy family have been demolished with the metal just left sitting in the sand. The BLM was running a 'scorched earth' campaign against this rancher, and yet people allow Reid to control the narrative by suggesting that the people who showed up to defend Cliven's family are the terrorists?

They need to start recalling these people. Don't wait for the next election. Recall them . . . yesterday!

And to squarepusher, evidence suggests that Bundy has made several improvements to the land, so I don't think the word "subsidize" fits. If anyone is getting screwed, it's the other ranchers who are paying 'grazing' fees which only go to militarize the BLM and have practically NOTHING to do with land conservation and maintenance. The poor suckers who continue to pay grazing fees are doing nothing but help fund an army to defend federal land until they can sell it off to special interests.

We talk a lot about 'starving the beast' but I guess it doesn't count if you're a millionaire rancher who doesn't want to pay taxes which fund a beast capable of this:

http://benswann.com/did-blm-bury-bundy-cattle-in-mass-grave-warning-graphic-images/

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

The poor suckers who continue to pay grazing fees are doing nothing but help fund an army to defend federal land until they can sell it off to special interests.


This needs to be repeated and can't be emphasized enough.

[WM_in_MO]

Fuck You Harry.

///

[Occam's Banana]

Reid said that Bundy “doesn’t believe that the American government is valid” and doesn’t follow the law, bringing up how hundreds of people showed up armed to defend Bundy to argue that they’re basically engaging in an act of domestic terrorism.

“600 people came. Armed. They had practice, they had maneuver, they knew what they were doing. They set up snipers in strategic locations with sniper rifles. They had assault weapons. They had automatic weapons… If there ever were an example of people who were domestic violent terrorist wannabes, these are the guys, and I think we should call it that way.”

Senator Harry Reid: today's version of Governor Thomas Gage?


Heller said, “What Senator Reid may call domestic terrorists, I call patriots.” Reid shot back, “If they’re patriots, we’re in real trouble.”

And the braying jackass probably didn't even realize that he zinged himself ...

[pcosmar]

Ronald Reagan put into law this about grazing fees:
Executive Order 12548 -- Grazing Fees
February 14, 1986

Yes he did.
And it was another executive order that should have never been penned.

Another decree that was not asked for by the people affected.

And it has put ranchers (families) out of business and driven up the price of producing food. to the benefit of Corporate Factory Farms.

Rule by decree.

[pcosmar]

Oh,, and another point of the narrative.
Federal Land.? It is not Federal Land.

The constitution does not allow the Federal Government to own that land. It is Open Range. NO Mans land. and everyone's land.

The peoples land. And it was managed by the people that lived there for well over 100 years before the government claimed some "right" to it.

this "Federal Land" bullshit needs to be removed from the conversation.

[otherone]

Reid said that Bundy “doesn’t believe that the American 'federal' government is valid”...... hundreds of people showed up armed to defend Bundy ..... they’re basically engaging in an act of domestic terrorism.
,
Believing the federal government isn't valid is an act of terrorism. It's 2014, and the definition of terrorism is simply anti-DC.
Be warned.

[nobody's_hero]

And the braying jackass probably didn't even realize that he zinged himself ...

I didn't even realize it, lol. +rep for you

[kcchiefs6465]

I'm gunna bring my cows over to you all your yards who disagree with me, and graze in your backyards, eat your vegetation, drink you water, shit on your land, then if you claim "property rights/trespassing" I will simply claim to not recognize your property. Sound pretty douchy? He is violating the laws of the will of the people.
Lol.

The laws of the will of the people?

First this is land assumed to be owned by a federal bureaucracy. Said federal bureaucracy can own no land, it can only squander it. Second, the people are half-retarded, blinded by exercises of petty power or the inclination to steal what isn't theirs, and when "their will" (if such an orwellian "democratic" term should even be uttered) is in conflict with the law their will means not a thing. First, the majority whose "will" has been trampled have never read the Constitution that allegedly governs this land. They have never read the executive orders, they aren't read on the corruption of the BLM and much more... in fact, I'd be willing to bet dollars to pennies that they're not read in anything aside from football statistics and celebrity gossip. This is so absurd. The will of the people is to take your money, send you off to a foreign land, nationalistically brand those who step away from their indoctrinated group think as acting terroristically or strange, imprison you for non-crimes, acquit the costumed murderers and more. To hell with their will.

Their cows using the land is more productive and beneficial for all than the land laying untended and overgrown, squandered in the name of federal overreach. I would urge you to look into this issue more deeply. Not simply the Bundy case but the entire case. Their policies are so shortsighted, heavy handed, and absurd, I have trouble believing that anyone read on the matter could support them. Absent those working for them, that is.

[Ender]

I have no problem with inheritance, or think worse of people who do so or of people who have money or do not. However in this case, its not just that he has wealth, its that he refuses to pay the already subsidized rate to graze his cattle, use water, shit on lands, claiming in his argument "he doesn't recognize the federal government," when in fact he is a multimillionaire rancher who has profited from federal subsidies greatly (any farmer or livestock ranchers do so in America). Its something like $1.50 per mother/calf pair per month, which is insanely cheap, and I guarantee he does not work 14 hours days, he most likely has illegal immigrants doing most of the heavy/hard work for him. He lost 2 court cases in federal court (assuming at this point when he fought the cases legally he did recognize the federal government), then loses the case and all of a sudden "doesn't recognize the federal government," and hes gunna use their property on the barrel of his gun. This is libertarianism at its worst, someone who fails in his channels the peaceful way then resorts to violence.

I'm gunna bring my cows over to you all your yards who disagree with me, and graze in your backyards, eat your vegetation, drink you water, shit on your land, then if you claim "property rights/trespassing" I will simply claim to not recognize your property. Sound pretty douchy? He is violating the laws of the will of the people.

Ronald Reagan put into law this about grazing fees:
Executive Order 12548 -- Grazing Fees
February 14, 1986

So these laws that Bundy are fighting (or he simply is at the point of not even acknowledging them or the federal government) were put into place by "conservative hero" Ronald Reagan. So my point is, it is not a Libertarian position to have to support Clive Bundy at all, some will choose to and these will be the extremists who don't recognize the federal government at all. Wouldn't it be convenient if any time someone was violating a federal law they could simply say "I don't recognize your authority!!1" and be off scott free? This is nothing even close to resembling the American Revolution either, since Cliven and his "militia" crew are about 500 strong who claim to not recognize the federal government, they would absolutely be crushed if they wanted to take this to a trade of force as the feds really did consider them a "foreign invader/terrorist." The feds could literally blow up his entire ranch with not even leaving their computer with drone strikes, so its a pretty stupid fight if he wants to take it to force, like a real revolution in 1776, so basically his only strategy is to try to "garner sympathy" with the American public, I guess that's what the whole "women and children" strategy was - a PR move, and thats what this whole thing is, which is why it is despicable to put the lives of these innocent Oathkeepers, and people helping him using their lives as a way to get public attention. On the sympathy note, which is all this is, there are plenty of other Americans more deserving of sympathy, like people who literally are in poverty, living 6 to an apartment, who have lost their homes, and the eroding middle class. The graduate with 100k in student loans with no jobs, the list goes on and on ... thats why I think it is ridiculous for this multimillionaire inheritee thousand acre land owner to by crying like a baby over not wanting to pay a few dollars a month to graze his cattle on other peoples land.

So basically if he doesn't recognize the feds as legitimate, that makes him an illegal immigrant and we should deport him with ICE :) Or maybe give his land back to the native americans/mexicans who were there before him?



That being said, I do disagree with the BLM show of force as well, it was very heavy handed, even if they were legally in the right, they didn't grasp the situation well as it is not worth losing human lives over. The Government can simply sit back and take him apart piecemeal by attacking his IRS refund, attaching liens on his bank accounts etc and waiting till he brings the cattle to market and placing a lien on the funds at that time.


You have just spouted the perfect progressive agenda while validating an unconstitutional EO and the unconstitutional grabbing of land by the feds. AND, all the while deriding a man who actually works for a living and has some bucks.

You've never been a rancher/farmer have you? It's a lot of work and not always much pay- no matter how many migrant workers you have.

Man, have you got a lot to learn.