Hunting Washington Forum

Community => Advocacy, Agencies, Access => Topic started by: wolfbait on February 11, 2017, 05:32:51 PM


Advertise Here
Title: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on February 11, 2017, 05:32:51 PM
Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See Or Hear (Video & Pictures)

http://freedomoutpost.com/heres-what-the-prosecutors-in-the-bundy-ranch-case-didnt-want-the-court-to-see-or-hear-video-pictures/
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: swordtine on February 11, 2017, 07:20:34 PM
That's Unreal there...the whole situation must be a living hell for those ranch families.....
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: mburrows on February 11, 2017, 07:49:13 PM
The bundys are crooks, no other way to explain that crew.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on February 11, 2017, 11:27:04 PM
Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See Or Hear (Video & Pictures)

http://freedomoutpost.com/heres-what-the-prosecutors-in-the-bundy-ranch-case-didnt-want-the-court-to-see-or-hear-video-pictures/
I think just before he left office Obama signed a order that takes part of their ranch for some preserve I think.
I hope they get acquitted in NV just like they did in Oregon. Bundy's are not crooks as been said but standing up for their lively hood against the real crooks- Federal, state, and probably local Govt's. BLM has been stealing peoples land for years over usurped power by using power they had/have no constitutional right to use in the first place, and aggressive practices that were designed to put them out of business to begin with.
Hey good find thanks man.
I don't the Bundy's are crooks comments from people on here. Saying they're crooks is saying it's ok to usurp power then telling people to pay this or that then take their cattle, land or what have you over something they had no right to do in the first place. People really need to listen to what the forefathers had said on land ownership, and power of the federal Govt, and truly read the articles from the constitution that they claim only allows Govt to own ten square miles and forts and other such needful things. I care less how the courts ruled on this, courts have no right to undermine what limits the federal powers.
I get why people are reluctant to let the states take over public land but that's how the Constitution had it planned to begin with so we need to honor that, and the states need to find a way to keep them public then.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: olyguy79 on February 11, 2017, 11:46:33 PM
Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See Or Hear (Video & Pictures)

http://freedomoutpost.com/heres-what-the-prosecutors-in-the-bundy-ranch-case-didnt-want-the-court-to-see-or-hear-video-pictures/
I think just before he left office Obama signed a order that takes part of their ranch for some preserve I think.
I hope they get acquitted in NV just like they did in Oregon. Bundy's are not crooks as been said but standing up for their lively hood against the real crooks- Federal, state, and probably local Govt's. BLM has been stealing peoples land for years over usurped power by using power they had/have no constitutional right to use in the first place, and aggressive practices that were designed to put them out of business to begin with.
Hey good find thanks man.
I don't the Bundy's are crooks comments from people on here. Saying they're crooks is saying it's ok to usurp power then telling people to pay this or that then take their cattle, land or what have you over something they had no right to do in the first place. People really need to listen to what the forefathers had said on land ownership, and power of the federal Govt, and truly read the articles from the constitution that they claim only allows Govt to own ten square miles and forts and other such needful things. I care less how the courts ruled on this, courts have no right to undermine what limits the federal powers.
I get why people are reluctant to let the states take over public land but that's how the Constitution had it planned to begin with so we need to honor that, and the states need to find a way to keep them public then.
Obama did not take part of their ranch. He designated BLM land in the Gold Butte area (which was already public BLM land) as monument land.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on February 12, 2017, 12:03:31 AM
Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See Or Hear (Video & Pictures)

http://freedomoutpost.com/heres-what-the-prosecutors-in-the-bundy-ranch-case-didnt-want-the-court-to-see-or-hear-video-pictures/
I think just before he left office Obama signed a order that takes part of their ranch for some preserve I think.
I hope they get acquitted in NV just like they did in Oregon. Bundy's are not crooks as been said but standing up for their lively hood against the real crooks- Federal, state, and probably local Govt's. BLM has been stealing peoples land for years over usurped power by using power they had/have no constitutional right to use in the first place, and aggressive practices that were designed to put them out of business to begin with.
Hey good find thanks man.
I don't the Bundy's are crooks comments from people on here. Saying they're crooks is saying it's ok to usurp power then telling people to pay this or that then take their cattle, land or what have you over something they had no right to do in the first place. People really need to listen to what the forefathers had said on land ownership, and power of the federal Govt, and truly read the articles from the constitution that they claim only allows Govt to own ten square miles and forts and other such needful things. I care less how the courts ruled on this, courts have no right to undermine what limits the federal powers.
I get why people are reluctant to let the states take over public land but that's how the Constitution had it planned to begin with so we need to honor that, and the states need to find a way to keep them public then.
Obama did not take part of their ranch. He designated BLM land in the Gold Butte area (which was already public BLM land) as monument land.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think so
http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/
a ways down is what they say on this.
or here's the text.
 Bundy Ranch Response to Gold Butte National Monument Designation

We, the Bundy Family, would like to say to President Obama that we are saddened, but not surprised, by the your decision to make our ranch and home a national monument. If any of this were really about protecting the land, you would come here, work with the local people who love this land, those who have a vested interest in this land, and take the time to learn what this land really needs. This is about control, pure and simple. You don’t love this land, you have never visited here, but you love being in control of this land. The problems we have had with federal land management have never been about cows, tortoises, or fees.  It has always been about the constitutional limits on the federal government’s authority.   While you enjoy a vacation in Hawaii we are here caring for this land and resisting federal overreach. Shame on you for undoing with your pen the good work we have done with our sweat for generations.  We call on Attorney General Adam Laxalt to fight this to the fullest extent of the law!
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: olyguy79 on February 12, 2017, 12:09:13 AM
Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See Or Hear (Video & Pictures)

http://freedomoutpost.com/heres-what-the-prosecutors-in-the-bundy-ranch-case-didnt-want-the-court-to-see-or-hear-video-pictures/
I think just before he left office Obama signed a order that takes part of their ranch for some preserve I think.
I hope they get acquitted in NV just like they did in Oregon. Bundy's are not crooks as been said but standing up for their lively hood against the real crooks- Federal, state, and probably local Govt's. BLM has been stealing peoples land for years over usurped power by using power they had/have no constitutional right to use in the first place, and aggressive practices that were designed to put them out of business to begin with.
Hey good find thanks man.
I don't the Bundy's are crooks comments from people on here. Saying they're crooks is saying it's ok to usurp power then telling people to pay this or that then take their cattle, land or what have you over something they had no right to do in the first place. People really need to listen to what the forefathers had said on land ownership, and power of the federal Govt, and truly read the articles from the constitution that they claim only allows Govt to own ten square miles and forts and other such needful things. I care less how the courts ruled on this, courts have no right to undermine what limits the federal powers.
I get why people are reluctant to let the states take over public land but that's how the Constitution had it planned to begin with so we need to honor that, and the states need to find a way to keep them public then.
Obama did not take part of their ranch. He designated BLM land in the Gold Butte area (which was already public BLM land) as monument land.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think so
http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/
a ways down is what they say on this.
or here's the text.
 Bundy Ranch Response to Gold Butte National Monument Designation

We, the Bundy Family, would like to say to President Obama that we are saddened, but not surprised, by the your decision to make our ranch and home a national monument. If any of this were really about protecting the land, you would come here, work with the local people who love this land, those who have a vested interest in this land, and take the time to learn what this land really needs. This is about control, pure and simple. You don’t love this land, you have never visited here, but you love being in control of this land. The problems we have had with federal land management have never been about cows, tortoises, or fees.  It has always been about the constitutional limits on the federal government’s authority.   While you enjoy a vacation in Hawaii we are here caring for this land and resisting federal overreach. Shame on you for undoing with your pen the good work we have done with our sweat for generations.  We call on Attorney General Adam Laxalt to fight this to the fullest extent of the law!
The Bundy's do not see the BLM as an actual land owner/manager. Obama did not use eminent domain or anything. A president can only declare a monument on current federal land, not private. Your not going to believe me I know so I'm just wasting time.

The Bundy family did not own any of the land that's now in the monument it was all 100% BLM land.

Apparently in the Bundy's view if they have cattle on land then they own the land. Well I hunt the Olympic Natl Forest so I guess it's my property now!! Gotta love Bundy thinking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: NW SURVEYOR on February 12, 2017, 06:26:32 AM
The Bundy's need the go to jail.
They overgrazel, thus destroying the landscape for elk, deer and other wildlife.
Then they don't pay their grazing fees and complain when the feds try the enforce the law.
There bullying tactics have gained some support from the far right wing nuts.
All done under the excuse or claim that they are looking out for the land they love.
I have a novel idea, go buy some land rather than steal mine.

Bunch of whining crooks, maybe your boy Trump will buy them some land.
He should be sympathetic as he is also a tax dodger.
Imagine living in a great country like ours and not paying taxes.
I agree that there is a certain amount of waste, but simply refusing to pay and pretending that it's OK is wrong in my opinion.
Anyway, you Bundy supporters should go down. To Nevada a d lend a hand, maybe get little closer to the land. While your at it, fix that fence to keep his cows off MY property.
Have a nice day.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: fish vacuum on February 12, 2017, 04:32:28 PM
I like this part from the link.

"In fact the Bureau of Land Management, according to Godlike productions, is considered an agent of foreign principle, meaning that they have no loyalty whatsoever to the United States and are, in fact, working for foreign entities. Just who does this unconstitutional government agency owe its allegiance to? According to Steve Quayle it is a London military banking cartel known as the Crown Corporation. Let me say this again, it is an English banking cartel that is issuing orders to many of these agencies."
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: mfswallace on December 19, 2017, 07:44:34 AM
http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/18/report-fed-agency-committed-militaristic-operation-against-nevada-rancher/?utm_medium=email

An investigation into the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) handling of the 2014 Nevada standoff with rancher Cliven Bundy revealed “incredible bias,” widespread misconduct and likely illegal actions by the BLM.

Prosecutors shared the report with the Bundys’ defense attorneys, prompting a petition to Judge Gloria Navarro for a mistrial, or for the case to be dismissed altogether, The Oregonian reports. Navarro’s judgement is expected to come down Wednesday.

“It’s time for our men to go home and start making a living for their families,” Carol Bundy, Cliven Bundy’s wife, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “We’re two years behind. We’ve got a lot of catching up to do.”

The investigation’s report, made by BLM Special Agent Larry Wooten and addressed to the Department of Justice, was publicized last week after Washington state Rep. Matt Shea posted it on his Facebook page, according to The Wall Street Journal.


Wooten’s 18-page report discussed some of what he witnessed during his three-year investigation, such as a BLM agent’s “kill list” featuring people who had committed suicide while under investigation by the agency, BLM agents and officials referring to the Bundys as “retards” and “*censored* bags,” agents bragging about “grinding” a Bundy family member’s face into gravel, and lead prosecutor and Nevada’s acting U.S. Attorney Steve Myhre’s “preferred ignorance” of investigation details that would benefit the Bundys’ defense case.

Former Special Agent Dan Love, who was in charge of impounding Cliven Bundy’s cattle in 2014, conducted “the most intrusive, oppressive, large scale and militaristic trespass cattle impound possible” against Bundy’s ranch against the direction of the U.S. attorney’s office, according to Wooten. The Bundys’ defense strategy accuses the BLM of using overly-aggressive and threatening tactics.

Navarro has ruled that Myhre’s prosecution team has committed numerous Brady Act violations failing to turn over exculpatory evidence, evidence that may exonerate the Bundys. In light of the violations and Wooten’s memo, Navarro sent the jury home last week as she considers ruling a mistrial or dismissing the case.

Wooten was removed from his position in the investigation in February by Myhre and his notes and case materials were taken. Assistant Special Agent Kent Klemen carried out Myhre’s order to gather Wooten’s data in what Wooten called a “raid” on his office.


Myhre declined TheDCNF’s request for comment.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: Stein on December 19, 2017, 08:06:29 AM
Yep, Bundy thinks he owns the BLM land.  Not as in part of the people that own the land, as in Bundy's family exclusively owns the land because he had a grazing permit at some point.  The entire portion of the monument was BLM land, zero part of it was private.  This is the type of misinformation that crew relies on to spread their lies and get people riled up about their cause of taking public land and making it privately owned by Bundy and those who think like they do.

Here is a map showing the boundary of the monument and what land it is made up of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gold_butte_national_monument.pdf

When Bundy says "our ranch" in the quote what he means is public land that is owned by everyone that he considers his personal possession.  He is a thief at his core, using any means up to and including armed occupation to steal something that isn't his.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: Special T on December 19, 2017, 08:36:38 AM
Yep, Bundy thinks he owns the BLM land.  Not as in part of the people that own the land, as in Bundy's family exclusively owns the land because he had a grazing permit at some point.  The entire portion of the monument was BLM land, zero part of it was private.  This is the type of misinformation that crew relies on to spread their lies and get people riled up about their cause of taking public land and making it privately owned by Bundy and those who think like they do.

Here is a map showing the boundary of the monument and what land it is made up of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gold_butte_national_monument.pdf

When Bundy says "our ranch" in the quote what he means is public land that is owned by everyone that he considers his personal possession.  He is a thief at his core, using any means up to and including armed occupation to steal something that isn't his.
One can own all manner of rights without paying a fee. A fee would imply rent. Water, mineral, hunting... and yes grazing rights can be had separate from physical ownership of land. Examples abound. This is why the Bundy issue is both interesting and important. This is what I've been waiting to see it boil down to.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: Stein on December 19, 2017, 09:12:51 AM
Bundy didn't have a lease on the land within the monument when it was declared a monument, there haven't been grazing leases on it since 1998.  He considers anything he or is family has ever had a lease on as their personal property. 

It's public land managed for multiple use.  Sometimes, that use doesn't involve Bundy's family and they can't accept that fact.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: Special T on December 19, 2017, 10:19:49 AM
A lease is not the same thing as a right.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: mfswallace on December 19, 2017, 10:47:50 AM
Yep, Bundy thinks he owns the BLM land.  Not as in part of the people that own the land, as in Bundy's family exclusively owns the land because he had a grazing permit at some point.  The entire portion of the monument was BLM land, zero part of it was private.  This is the type of misinformation that crew relies on to spread their lies and get people riled up about their cause of taking public land and making it privately owned by Bundy and those who think like they do.

Here is a map showing the boundary of the monument and what land it is made up of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gold_butte_national_monument.pdf

When Bundy says "our ranch" in the quote what he means is public land that is owned by everyone that he considers his personal possession.  He is a thief at his core, using any means up to and including armed occupation to steal something that isn't his.

U must not have read this... I unlike you don't know first hand any bundys but thought this was an interesting perspective from someone in the BLM who contends his org was bias and acted illegally...

 ---------------
An investigation into the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) handling of the 2014 Nevada standoff with rancher Cliven Bundy revealed “incredible bias,” widespread misconduct and likely illegal actions by the BLM.

Prosecutors shared the report with the Bundys’ defense attorneys, prompting a petition to Judge Gloria Navarro for a mistrial, or for the case to be dismissed altogether, The Oregonian reports. Navarro’s judgement is expected to come down Wednesday.

“It’s time for our men to go home and start making a living for their families,” Carol Bundy, Cliven Bundy’s wife, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “We’re two years behind. We’ve got a lot of catching up to do.”

The investigation’s report, made by BLM Special Agent Larry Wooten and addressed to the Department of Justice, was publicized last week after Washington state Rep. Matt Shea posted it on his Facebook page, according to The Wall Street Journal.


Wooten’s 18-page report discussed some of what he witnessed during his three-year investigation, such as a BLM agent’s “kill list” featuring people who had committed suicide while under investigation by the agency, BLM agents and officials referring to the Bundys as “retards” and “*censored* bags,” agents bragging about “grinding” a Bundy family member’s face into gravel, and lead prosecutor and Nevada’s acting U.S. Attorney Steve Myhre’s “preferred ignorance” of investigation details that would benefit the Bundys’ defense case.

Former Special Agent Dan Love, who was in charge of impounding Cliven Bundy’s cattle in 2014, conducted “the most intrusive, oppressive, large scale and militaristic trespass cattle impound possible” against Bundy’s ranch against the direction of the U.S. attorney’s office, according to Wooten. The Bundys’ defense strategy accuses the BLM of using overly-aggressive and threatening tactics.

Navarro has ruled that Myhre’s prosecution team has committed numerous Brady Act violations failing to turn over exculpatory evidence, evidence that may exonerate the Bundys. In light of the violations and Wooten’s memo, Navarro sent the jury home last week as she considers ruling a mistrial or dismissing the case.

Wooten was removed from his position in the investigation in February by Myhre and his notes and case materials were taken. Assistant Special Agent Kent Klemen carried out Myhre’s order to gather Wooten’s data in what Wooten called a “raid” on his office.


Myhre declined TheDCNF’s request for comment.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: SpotandStalk on December 19, 2017, 11:37:45 AM
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2017/12/blm_investigator_alleges_misco.html

This article provides further details on the Wooten memo....very informative read.  Now the Bundy's were indeed in the wrong regarding their grazing lease, but the government was outright criminal in their handling of the situation and then tried to hide it.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 19, 2017, 11:48:17 AM
The Bundy family are great AMERICANS. They aren't crooks, thieves or anything you want to call them. The government is, it's so obvious, it's disgusting.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: Stein on December 19, 2017, 11:50:41 AM
Bundy stopped making payments on his lease back in 1993, predating any of the references above.  Even if the Wooten stuff is true (only attributed to one person's account and not verified), it gives Bundy no right to the multitude of illegal actions on his part.  He clearly states his beef is that the land is under federal control and should belong to his family as it is his ranch.

He took the BLM to court many times and lost.  If there is new evidence of BLM wrongdoing, take them back to court.  When you don't get your way, you can't simply pick up rifles, threaten civilians and law enforcement, get stuff for free and have armed standoffs.

It is inarguable fact that they didn't make payments yet kept grazing their animals on land they had no legal access to.  This is trespassing and theft of a public resource which makes them thieves.  There is no way around the facts.  Maybe he was wronged, but that doesn't mean he can then steal from the American public who owns the land he trespassed and stole from.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 19, 2017, 07:09:11 PM
The Bundy family are great AMERICANS. They aren't crooks, thieves or anything you want to call them. The government is, it's so obvious, it's disgusting.
there ya go finally some sense comment not some status is ok Zombie apocalypse statement.  :tup:
Exactly which is why charges are more likely to be dropped soon.
They've already let most of them out and have said they won't be needed until way later.
After Ryan Bundies Butt kicking opening statement about the BLM and no more moo by 92 signs he said you'd see in their offices, and about how BLM did in fact have snipers and pics to prove it yeah.
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/obamas-executive-order-land-grab-just-designated-the-bundy-ranch-a-national-monument_12302016
https://freedomoutpost.com/blm-whistleblower-believes-blm-violation-law-regarding-law-enforcement-authority/
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 20, 2017, 07:04:26 AM
BLM investigating themselves, hah ! The corrupt government is just making an example out of the Bundys because they have lost face in this entire problem. They assassinated LaVoy Finnicum too.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: Timberstalker on December 20, 2017, 07:21:11 AM
I'll just leave this here......
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: idahohuntr on December 20, 2017, 08:50:22 AM

It is inarguable fact that they didn't make payments yet kept grazing their animals on land they had no legal access to.  This is trespassing and theft of a public resource which makes them thieves.  There is no way around the facts. 
:yeah:
If they were stealing from a neighbor like what they have stolen from the taxpayers of this country they probably would have been shot years ago. 
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: ribka on December 20, 2017, 08:54:09 AM
The bundys are crooks, no other way to explain that crew.

yep, gotta pay your taxes. Not the best role models for libertarians. Much better causes out there to make the over reaching govt argument imho
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: ribka on December 20, 2017, 08:56:58 AM
Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See Or Hear (Video & Pictures)

http://freedomoutpost.com/heres-what-the-prosecutors-in-the-bundy-ranch-case-didnt-want-the-court-to-see-or-hear-video-pictures/
I think just before he left office Obama signed a order that takes part of their ranch for some preserve I think.
I hope they get acquitted in NV just like they did in Oregon. Bundy's are not crooks as been said but standing up for their lively hood against the real crooks- Federal, state, and probably local Govt's. BLM has been stealing peoples land for years over usurped power by using power they had/have no constitutional right to use in the first place, and aggressive practices that were designed to put them out of business to begin with.
Hey good find thanks man.
I don't the Bundy's are crooks comments from people on here. Saying they're crooks is saying it's ok to usurp power then telling people to pay this or that then take their cattle, land or what have you over something they had no right to do in the first place. People really need to listen to what the forefathers had said on land ownership, and power of the federal Govt, and truly read the articles from the constitution that they claim only allows Govt to own ten square miles and forts and other such needful things. I care less how the courts ruled on this, courts have no right to undermine what limits the federal powers.
I get why people are reluctant to let the states take over public land but that's how the Constitution had it planned to begin with so we need to honor that, and the states need to find a way to keep them public then.


Now, I think if the Bundys were raising pitbulls on BLM land and not paying taxes and required fees it would be ok :tup:
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: elkchaser54 on December 20, 2017, 09:21:11 AM
If Bias and name calling is all you have, I think most that police cases could get thrown out on the same accord.  They were using land that wasn't theirs and didn't want to pay for it because they didn't used to pay.  Imagine a parking lot that you have been using for years to park while you work suddenly requires you to pay.  Youre pissed, youre angry but you PAY.  You don't decide to take over the parking lot and heavily arm yourself.  Bundy's are disillusioned libertarians that think the government is taking things from them but they are just trying to find a way to allow everyone to use the land, not just the Bundy family.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 20, 2017, 12:16:02 PM
Just heard there was a mistrial on the Bundys court case.. Good.  :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup:
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 20, 2017, 12:34:29 PM
Just heard there was a mistrial on the Bundys court case.. Good.  :tup: :tup: :tup: :tup:


 :yeah: :tup: :tup:


Why The Feds Chickened Out On A Nevada Ranch

https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2014/04/13/why-the-feds-chickened-out-on-a-nevada-ranch-n1823838
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: huntnfmly on December 20, 2017, 12:37:20 PM
Great news best I've heard in awhile
 Now Dwight and Steven Hammond should be pardoned and let out
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: WSU on December 20, 2017, 12:40:48 PM
It's incredible how inept and dishonest the feds appear to be in this case.  Assuming the news accounts are true, a mistrial is the right decision.  Hopefully, the feds clean house (their own house) and retry the case the right way. 
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: timberfaller on December 20, 2017, 12:46:41 PM
Seeing how the Feds have been losing right and left over the Bundy's(lost even in liberal Portland)issues, KINDA gives one real insight as to Mueller and Crew!!! :yike: :yike: :yike: :yike:

In podunk USA this has taken place, just imagine HOW BAD its in DC!!!!!
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 20, 2017, 04:43:17 PM
Great news best I've heard in awhile
 Now Dwight and Steven Hammond should be pardoned and let out


 :yeah: :tup:

Judge Declares Mistrial In Standoff Case After Gov’t Misconduct Discovered

http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/judge-declares-mistrial-in-standoff-case-after-govt-misconduct-discovered/?utm_medium=email

The back trail of the BLM, USFWS with the FBI left a pretty bad stench.


Mistrial declared in Cliven Bundy standoff case

http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2017/12/mistrial_declared_in_cliven_bu.html


Plus there should be a real investigation into the murder of Robert LaVoy Finicum, and whether the little killers were FBI or OSP they should be held accountable.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: Special T on December 20, 2017, 05:35:22 PM
Given how far the FBIs credibility has fallen in others areas I'm not really surprised at how this paints them as untrustworthy.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: huntnfmly on December 20, 2017, 07:22:23 PM


Plus there should be a real investigation into the murder of Robert LaVoy Finicum, and whether the little killers were FBI or OSP they should be held accountable.
 :yeah:
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wsmnut on December 20, 2017, 09:05:28 PM
The Bundy’s are crooks and should be behind bars.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 20, 2017, 10:00:31 PM
The Bundy’s are crooks and should be behind bars.

You are lost in the fog of BLM corruption, spend a little time in the research department.....
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: dwils233 on December 20, 2017, 10:36:40 PM
I think before the Bundy's run around accusing every aspect of the US government of lying, cheating and screwing them over, maybe they should get their act together. Like someone else said, there are better hills to die on if your a libertarian.

I'm not a libertarian. But I am an American and a veteran, and I have a very low opinion of any organization or individual who thinks that the best and appropriate way to air their grievances is to occupy a government facility while armed. You do that and lose, you face the consequences and they should be dire. You do it and win, you get to make new rules. Tell me how sympathetic you all would be if a bunch of armed native Hawaiians tried to "take back" k-bay or pearl harbor.

I get some people have issues with the government, but Jesus find a better martyr than snowflakes like the Bundy's occupying our collective land and treating it like it's their personal property all the while ducking their grazing fees. I promise there are far greater injustices in this country than those people
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 21, 2017, 09:57:08 AM
I think before the Bundy's run around accusing every aspect of the US government of lying, cheating and screwing them over, maybe they should get their act together. Like someone else said, there are better hills to die on if your a libertarian.

I'm not a libertarian. But I am an American and a veteran, and I have a very low opinion of any organization or individual who thinks that the best and appropriate way to air their grievances is to occupy a government facility while armed. You do that and lose, you face the consequences and they should be dire. You do it and win, you get to make new rules. Tell me how sympathetic you all would be if a bunch of armed native Hawaiians tried to "take back" k-bay or pearl harbor.

I get some people have issues with the government, but Jesus find a better martyr than snowflakes like the Bundy's occupying our collective land and treating it like it's their personal property all the while ducking their grazing fees. I promise there are far greater injustices in this country than those people

 If the corrupt BLM, USFWS decided they were going to take your land, your livelihood, would you curl up in a little ball and let them have it.




http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,212806.0.html
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: dwils233 on December 21, 2017, 10:23:57 AM
I think before the Bundy's run around accusing every aspect of the US government of lying, cheating and screwing them over, maybe they should get their act together. Like someone else said, there are better hills to die on if your a libertarian.

I'm not a libertarian. But I am an American and a veteran, and I have a very low opinion of any organization or individual who thinks that the best and appropriate way to air their grievances is to occupy a government facility while armed. You do that and lose, you face the consequences and they should be dire. You do it and win, you get to make new rules. Tell me how sympathetic you all would be if a bunch of armed native Hawaiians tried to "take back" k-bay or pearl harbor.

I get some people have issues with the government, but Jesus find a better martyr than snowflakes like the Bundy's occupying our collective land and treating it like it's their personal property all the while ducking their grazing fees. I promise there are far greater injustices in this country than those people

 If the corrupt BLM, USFWS decided they were going to take your land, your livelihood, would you curl up in a little ball and let them have it.




http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,212806.0.html

Well if I engaged in the textbook definition of terrorism by the US government (the use of violence or the threat of violence for political change) I expect to be treated as one. Every single domestic terrorist thinks they were wronged by the government in some way. Some may have been. But there's consequences to such actions. I've got no more tolerance for the Bundy's than I do for any other person who thinks that taking up arms against the federal government is the best and first option to prove your views are best.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: WSU on December 21, 2017, 10:28:14 AM
I think before the Bundy's run around accusing every aspect of the US government of lying, cheating and screwing them over, maybe they should get their act together. Like someone else said, there are better hills to die on if your a libertarian.

I'm not a libertarian. But I am an American and a veteran, and I have a very low opinion of any organization or individual who thinks that the best and appropriate way to air their grievances is to occupy a government facility while armed. You do that and lose, you face the consequences and they should be dire. You do it and win, you get to make new rules. Tell me how sympathetic you all would be if a bunch of armed native Hawaiians tried to "take back" k-bay or pearl harbor.

I get some people have issues with the government, but Jesus find a better martyr than snowflakes like the Bundy's occupying our collective land and treating it like it's their personal property all the while ducking their grazing fees. I promise there are far greater injustices in this country than those people

 If the corrupt BLM, USFWS decided they were going to take your land, your livelihood, would you curl up in a little ball and let them have it.




http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,212806.0.html

Well if I engaged in the textbook definition of terrorism by the US government (the use of violence or the threat of violence for political change). Every single domestic terrorist things they were wronged by the government in some way. Some may have been. But there's consequences to such actions. I've got no more tolerance for the Bundy's than I do for any other person who thinks that taking up arms against the federal government is the best and first option to prove your views are best.

Except these guys had cows, horses, and cowboy hats.  Can't you see the difference?
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 21, 2017, 10:56:13 AM
I think before the Bundy's run around accusing every aspect of the US government of lying, cheating and screwing them over, maybe they should get their act together. Like someone else said, there are better hills to die on if your a libertarian.

I'm not a libertarian. But I am an American and a veteran, and I have a very low opinion of any organization or individual who thinks that the best and appropriate way to air their grievances is to occupy a government facility while armed. You do that and lose, you face the consequences and they should be dire. You do it and win, you get to make new rules. Tell me how sympathetic you all would be if a bunch of armed native Hawaiians tried to "take back" k-bay or pearl harbor.

I get some people have issues with the government, but Jesus find a better martyr than snowflakes like the Bundy's occupying our collective land and treating it like it's their personal property all the while ducking their grazing fees. I promise there are far greater injustices in this country than those people

 If the corrupt BLM, USFWS decided they were going to take your land, your livelihood, would you curl up in a little ball and let them have it.




http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,212806.0.html

Well if I engaged in the textbook definition of terrorism by the US government (the use of violence or the threat of violence for political change) I expect to be treated as one. Every single domestic terrorist thinks they were wronged by the government in some way. Some may have been. But there's consequences to such actions. I've got no more tolerance for the Bundy's than I do for any other person who thinks that taking up arms against the federal government is the best and first option to prove your views are best.

 

Do you know why the 2nd amendment was created or why it is so important? 



Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: dwils233 on December 21, 2017, 11:22:29 AM
I think before the Bundy's run around accusing every aspect of the US government of lying, cheating and screwing them over, maybe they should get their act together. Like someone else said, there are better hills to die on if your a libertarian.

I'm not a libertarian. But I am an American and a veteran, and I have a very low opinion of any organization or individual who thinks that the best and appropriate way to air their grievances is to occupy a government facility while armed. You do that and lose, you face the consequences and they should be dire. You do it and win, you get to make new rules. Tell me how sympathetic you all would be if a bunch of armed native Hawaiians tried to "take back" k-bay or pearl harbor.

I get some people have issues with the government, but Jesus find a better martyr than snowflakes like the Bundy's occupying our collective land and treating it like it's their personal property all the while ducking their grazing fees. I promise there are far greater injustices in this country than those people

 If the corrupt BLM, USFWS decided they were going to take your land, your livelihood, would you curl up in a little ball and let them have it.




http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,212806.0.html

Well if I engaged in the textbook definition of terrorism by the US government (the use of violence or the threat of violence for political change) I expect to be treated as one. Every single domestic terrorist thinks they were wronged by the government in some way. Some may have been. But there's consequences to such actions. I've got no more tolerance for the Bundy's than I do for any other person who thinks that taking up arms against the federal government is the best and first option to prove your views are best.

 

Do you know why the 2nd amendment was created or why it is so important?

I do as a matter of fact, not sure your background but I did my military service and I remember the oath I took to defend it. I even addressed that in my first post. if you take up arms against the government, you better win that fight. you try to mutiny and you lose, you walk the plank. Our founding fathers knew they signed a death warrant if they lost- they wouldn't sail to england and boohoo in front of an English magistrate and think they'd get off scott free. Thats not how it works when you attempt to use violence or the threat of violence to make political change-and lose.

Its hypocritical to call the federal government corrupt and broken to the point of needing armed resistance, but then to use the court system to prove you weren't in the wrong. That would imply that the court system could have been used to address their problems judicousily to begin with.

I'm not going to change your mind and I think you can tell you won't change mine.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 21, 2017, 12:04:19 PM
I think before the Bundy's run around accusing every aspect of the US government of lying, cheating and screwing them over, maybe they should get their act together. Like someone else said, there are better hills to die on if your a libertarian.

I'm not a libertarian. But I am an American and a veteran, and I have a very low opinion of any organization or individual who thinks that the best and appropriate way to air their grievances is to occupy a government facility while armed. You do that and lose, you face the consequences and they should be dire. You do it and win, you get to make new rules. Tell me how sympathetic you all would be if a bunch of armed native Hawaiians tried to "take back" k-bay or pearl harbor.

I get some people have issues with the government, but Jesus find a better martyr than snowflakes like the Bundy's occupying our collective land and treating it like it's their personal property all the while ducking their grazing fees. I promise there are far greater injustices in this country than those people

 If the corrupt BLM, USFWS decided they were going to take your land, your livelihood, would you curl up in a little ball and let them have it.




http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,212806.0.html

Well if I engaged in the textbook definition of terrorism by the US government (the use of violence or the threat of violence for political change) I expect to be treated as one. Every single domestic terrorist thinks they were wronged by the government in some way. Some may have been. But there's consequences to such actions. I've got no more tolerance for the Bundy's than I do for any other person who thinks that taking up arms against the federal government is the best and first option to prove your views are best.

 

Do you know why the 2nd amendment was created or why it is so important?

I do as a matter of fact, not sure your background but I did my military service and I remember the oath I took to defend it. I even addressed that in my first post. if you take up arms against the government, you better win that fight. you try to mutiny and you lose, you walk the plank. Our founding fathers knew they signed a death warrant if they lost- they wouldn't sail to england and boohoo in front of an English magistrate and think they'd get off scott free. Thats not how it works when you attempt to use violence or the threat of violence to make political change-and lose.

Its hypocritical to call the federal government corrupt and broken to the point of needing armed resistance, but then to use the court system to prove you weren't in the wrong. That would imply that the court system could have been used to address their problems judicousily to begin with.

I'm not going to change your mind and I think you can tell you won't change mine.


You definitely have the last part right!

But then I don't think you have actually looked into the Hammond-Bundy case too much.

 As far as going up against the Gov, I believe it was the Bundy's etc. defending themselves against the corrupt BLM etc..

FBI-OSP Murdered Robert LaVoy Finicum, if you think that's ok, then you are right, we have nothing to discuss.

Carry on.......
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: elkchaser54 on December 21, 2017, 01:25:07 PM
Since when do you have to protect yourself from the Bureau of Land Management???
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: slavenoid on December 21, 2017, 03:02:49 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 21, 2017, 04:06:27 PM
The government works for us and that's why we have a the 2A. We need to have them in check, which isn't that way. We've let them trample all of our rights. This needs to come to an end. ANTIFA is paid to fight for a Hungarian billionaire and we, as REDBLOODED Americans cannot. Change is coming..
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wsmnut on December 21, 2017, 05:00:35 PM
I think before the Bundy's run around accusing every aspect of the US government of lying, cheating and screwing them over, maybe they should get their act together. Like someone else said, there are better hills to die on if your a libertarian.

I'm not a libertarian. But I am an American and a veteran, and I have a very low opinion of any organization or individual who thinks that the best and appropriate way to air their grievances is to occupy a government facility while armed. You do that and lose, you face the consequences and they should be dire. You do it and win, you get to make new rules. Tell me how sympathetic you all would be if a bunch of armed native Hawaiians tried to "take back" k-bay or pearl harbor.

I get some people have issues with the government, but Jesus find a better martyr than snowflakes like the Bundy's occupying our collective land and treating it like it's their personal property all the while ducking their grazing fees. I promise there are far greater injustices in this country than those people

 If the corrupt BLM, USFWS decided they were going to take your land, your livelihood, would you curl up in a little ball and let them have it.




http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,212806.0.html

Wolf bait/long shot:

The criminals in question AKA the Bundy’s didn’t take anyone’s land.  They tried taking EVERYONE’s land.   Can you comprehend the difference?  And this was after they didn’t pay their grazing fees to us.  The owners of the land.
     Don’t try to obfuscate this.  It’s not that complicated.  They are law breaking scum and should be locked up.  Not venerated or celebrated.

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 21, 2017, 05:39:58 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?


The BLM does not own the land. It's the peoples land, period.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: bigtex on December 21, 2017, 05:51:23 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Of course they still use federal land. It's kind of like how Ammon Bundy doesn't recognize the federal government but took out a half million dollar federal small business loan in 2010.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 21, 2017, 06:06:42 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Of course they still use federal land. It's kind of like how Ammon Bundy doesn't recognize the federal government but took out a half million dollar federal small business loan in 2010.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Probably needed the money for lawyers to fight the corrupt BLM...

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: bigtex on December 21, 2017, 06:09:45 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Of course they still use federal land. It's kind of like how Ammon Bundy doesn't recognize the federal government but took out a half million dollar federal small business loan in 2010.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Probably needed the money for lawyers to fight the corrupt BLM...
Well with that mindsight I guess I should take out a half million dollar loan because I may need it in a few years if I get arrested.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 21, 2017, 06:10:14 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Of course they still use federal land. It's kind of like how Ammon Bundy doesn't recognize the federal government but took out a half million dollar federal small business loan in 2010.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk



7 years before for his trucking business. What's that have to do with the ranching and the corrupt BLM killing cattle and snipers threatening his fathers ranching standoff ? Nothing.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: bigtex on December 21, 2017, 06:14:07 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Of course they still use federal land. It's kind of like how Ammon Bundy doesn't recognize the federal government but took out a half million dollar federal small business loan in 2010.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk



7 years before for his trucking business. What's that have to do with the ranching and the corrupt BLM killing cattle and snipers threatening his fathers ranching standoff ? Nothing.
It absolutely does!

He says he doesn't believe in the feds. I'm pretty sure he had that belief in 2010. So if he doesn't believe in the feds why take out a half million dollar loan from the same entity you don't believe exists?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: olyguy79 on December 21, 2017, 06:16:04 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Of course they still use federal land. It's kind of like how Ammon Bundy doesn't recognize the federal government but took out a half million dollar federal small business loan in 2010.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk



7 years before for his trucking business. What's that have to do with the ranching and the corrupt BLM killing cattle and snipers threatening his fathers ranching standoff ? Nothing.
It absolutely does!

He says he doesn't believe in the feds. I'm pretty sure he had that belief in 2010. So if he doesn't believe in the feds why take out a half million dollar loan from the same entity you don't believe exists?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
:yeah:

The Bundy family is nothing more than a large welfare family. They want to graze on MY public land for free. They want MY tax money so they can fund their trucking business.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: Humptulips on December 21, 2017, 06:18:50 PM
These trials are not about the land, who owns it or whether the Federal Government should own it.
They are about your right to protest. It seems OK for Black Lives Matter, Antifa and the like to protest, even destroy public and private property but a bunch of country folk want to protest they find themselves in jail.
It doesn't matter what kind of crazy ideas the Bundy's may have. They have the right to peaceably assemble and protest.
For those who don't like that they had guns it has never been proven they used them for anything more then an assertion of their Second Amendment rights.
Now it seems the Feds have conspired to deny them a fair trial.
I hope they dismiss all charges.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 21, 2017, 06:28:13 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Of course they still use federal land. It's kind of like how Ammon Bundy doesn't recognize the federal government but took out a half million dollar federal small business loan in 2010.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk



7 years before for his trucking business. What's that have to do with the ranching and the corrupt BLM killing cattle and snipers threatening his fathers ranching standoff ? Nothing.
It absolutely does!

He says he doesn't believe in the feds. I'm pretty sure he had that belief in 2010. So if he doesn't believe in the feds why take out a half million dollar loan from the same entity you don't believe exists?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
:yeah:

The Bundy family is nothing more than a large welfare family. They want to graze on MY public land for free. They want MY tax money so they can fund their trucking business.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
It is a double whammy when it seems like it was some of the most incompetent of the government's personnel that were to deal with this situation.  Spending what has snowballed to something like $75 mil also tax dollars (? I can't get a good number) to collect just under $1 mil owed (but supposedly tried to pay to a county) by an old geezer living in the middle of the desert.  :dunno:
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: olyguy79 on December 21, 2017, 06:32:43 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Of course they still use federal land. It's kind of like how Ammon Bundy doesn't recognize the federal government but took out a half million dollar federal small business loan in 2010.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk



7 years before for his trucking business. What's that have to do with the ranching and the corrupt BLM killing cattle and snipers threatening his fathers ranching standoff ? Nothing.
It absolutely does!

He says he doesn't believe in the feds. I'm pretty sure he had that belief in 2010. So if he doesn't believe in the feds why take out a half million dollar loan from the same entity you don't believe exists?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
:yeah:

The Bundy family is nothing more than a large welfare family. They want to graze on MY public land for free. They want MY tax money so they can fund their trucking business.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
It is a double whammy when it seems like it was some of the most incompetent of the government's personnel that were to deal with this situation.  Spending what has snowballed to something like $75 mil also tax dollars (? I can't get a good number) to collect just under $1 mil owed (but supposedly tried to pay to a county) by an old geezer living in the middle of the desert.  :dunno:
The government doesn't make money in criminal cases they lose it. Does that mean they should no longer file criminal charges on anything?

Even a piddly DUI trial costs the government more $ than it will receive in the fine.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 21, 2017, 06:40:10 PM
Didn't say or even imply that.  I'm concerned with waste of all tax dollars.  People in the government need to be accountable for the botches that have occurred along the way in this mess.  Hopefully, not with full retirements or basement promotions.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 21, 2017, 07:21:04 PM
Let's get this straight then, so all the companies who get large loans from the government, are welfare grabbers and are worthless companies. The government isn't in the business to make money off of criminal cases. It's not in the constitution. Bundys family has been grazing this land BEFORE the BLM even existed. Humptulips is 100% right. I think most on here listen to the mainstream, lying, fake news, media and make a decision on that. There are 2 sides to every story and the corrupt governments isn't truthfull. If you think they are funding their trucking company, which it's not, it's a heavy truck repair company, you better bitch about a lot of other free stuff the government hands out on our dime. Welfare, illegals, food stamps, section 8 housing, free transportation to name a few. This is what I mean that you crying babies on here don't know what you're talking about. Some of you don't know squat and rely on comments posted here.

Who came in a started rounding up and killing and burying the cattle in mass graves, the BLM, with Dan Love in charge.. Then the Bundys rallied against the corrupt government, with their LEGAL, 1st Amendment right to protest. Dan Love lost his job because of his military, SWAT actions against the Bundys. The Bundys had to be made an example out of this because of Dan Loves actions.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: bigtex on December 21, 2017, 07:48:00 PM
Let's get this straight then, so all the companies who get large loans from the government, are welfare grabbers and are worthless companies. The government isn't in the business to make money off of criminal cases. It's not in the constitution. Bundys family has been grazing this land BEFORE the BLM even existed. Humptulips is 100% right. I think most on here listen to the mainstream, lying, fake news, media and make a decision on that. There are 2 sides to every story and the corrupt governments isn't truthfull. If you think they are funding their trucking company, which it's not, it's a heavy truck repair company, you better bitch about a lot of other free stuff the government hands out on our dime. Welfare, illegals, food stamps, section 8 housing, free transportation to name a few. This is what I mean that you crying babies on here don't know what you're talking about. Some of you don't know squat and rely on comments posted here.

Who came in a started rounding up and killing and burying the cattle in mass graves, the BLM, with Dan Love in charge.. Then the Bundys rallied against the corrupt government, with their LEGAL, 1st Amendment right to protest. Dan Love lost his job because of his military, SWAT actions against the Bundys. The Bundys had to be made an example out of this because of Dan Loves actions.
Dan Love didn't lose his job because of the Bundy's at all!

He lost his job because of the other BS he pulled. Handing out Native American artifacts as gifts to employees and friends, jacking up contracts and other requests at Burning Man, deleting emails and lying about statements (well there's a weird one). Dan Love was the subject of multiple Office of Inspector General investigations, none of which had to do with Bundy.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: olyguy79 on December 21, 2017, 07:49:28 PM
Let's get this straight then, so all the companies who get large loans from the government, are welfare grabbers and are worthless companies. The government isn't in the business to make money off of criminal cases. It's not in the constitution. Bundys family has been grazing this land BEFORE the BLM even existed. Humptulips is 100% right. I think most on here listen to the mainstream, lying, fake news, media and make a decision on that. There are 2 sides to every story and the corrupt governments isn't truthfull. If you think they are funding their trucking company, which it's not, it's a heavy truck repair company, you better bitch about a lot of other free stuff the government hands out on our dime. Welfare, illegals, food stamps, section 8 housing, free transportation to name a few. This is what I mean that you crying babies on here don't know what you're talking about. Some of you don't know squat and rely on comments posted here.

Who came in a started rounding up and killing and burying the cattle in mass graves, the BLM, with Dan Love in charge.. Then the Bundys rallied against the corrupt government, with their LEGAL, 1st Amendment right to protest. Dan Love lost his job because of his military, SWAT actions against the Bundys. The Bundys had to be made an example out of this because of Dan Loves actions.
Dan Love didn't lose his job because of the Bundy's at all!

He lost his job because of the other BS he pulled. Handing out Native American artifacts as gifts to employees and friends, jacking up contracts and other requests at Burning Man, deleting emails and lying about statements (well there's a weird one). Dan Love was the subject of multiple Office of Inspector General investigations, none of which had to do with Bundy.
:yeah:
A former coworker works for DOI OIG and Bigtex is correct. It was the lying, government property, and money issues that got Love fired, not the Bundy incident.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: olyguy79 on December 21, 2017, 07:53:52 PM
If you think they are funding their trucking company, which it's not, it's a heavy truck repair company, you better bitch about a lot of other free stuff the government hands out on our dime. Welfare, illegals, food stamps, section 8 housing, free transportation to name a few. This is what I mean that you crying babies on here don't know what you're talking about. Some of you don't know squat and rely on comments posted here.

Oooh it's not a trucking company but rather it's a heavy truck repair company. Who cares? The point is still the same! He could run a government funded baseball card shop for all I care. The fact is you have one of the most well-known anti-govt individuals in the US taking over a half-million dollars from the same government he speaks out against. A little ironic isn't it?
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 21, 2017, 09:53:06 PM
Bundy stopped making payments on his lease back in 1993, predating any of the references above.  Even if the Wooten stuff is true (only attributed to one person's account and not verified), it gives Bundy no right to the multitude of illegal actions on his part.  He clearly states his beef is that the land is under federal control and should belong to his family as it is his ranch.

He took the BLM to court many times and lost.  If there is new evidence of BLM wrongdoing, take them back to court.  When you don't get your way, you can't simply pick up rifles, threaten civilians and law enforcement, get stuff for free and have armed standoffs.

It is inarguable fact that they didn't make payments yet kept grazing their animals on land they had no legal access to.  This is trespassing and theft of a public resource which makes them thieves.  There is no way around the facts.  Maybe he was wronged, but that doesn't mean he can then steal from the American public who owns the land he trespassed and stole from.
First off you don't pay usurpers. Secondly yes he did pay he just didn't pay the thieving feds he paid the state of Nevada which is what he feels is the correct choice.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 21, 2017, 09:58:17 PM
It's incredible how inept and dishonest the feds appear to be in this case.  Assuming the news accounts are true, a mistrial is the right decision.  Hopefully, the feds clean house (their own house) and retry the case the right way.
No just leave them alone this time. First off they never did get a conviction of conspiracy in any of the other trials they already went through. Secondly they acquitted them in Oregon, of which they more likely wouldn't get one here either; Not for conspiracy that is.
But yeah and over zealous Govt to ready to persecute/prosecute, and do anything they could. and yet people still want to follow that? :dunno:
I'd sooner follow a rattlesnake onto it's den than follow corrupt Feds. :twocents:
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 21, 2017, 09:59:24 PM
Great news best I've heard in awhile
 Now Dwight and Steven Hammond should be pardoned and let out


 :yeah: :tup:

Judge Declares Mistrial In Standoff Case After Gov’t Misconduct Discovered

http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/judge-declares-mistrial-in-standoff-case-after-govt-misconduct-discovered/?utm_medium=email

The back trail of the BLM, USFWS with the FBI left a pretty bad stench.


Mistrial declared in Cliven Bundy standoff case

http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2017/12/mistrial_declared_in_cliven_bu.html


Plus there should be a real investigation into the murder of Robert LaVoy Finicum, and whether the little killers were FBI or OSP they should be held accountable.
yeah buddy now leave them alone.
Hope they let Cliven out soon too.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: fish vacuum on December 22, 2017, 03:31:08 PM


First off you don't pay usurpers. Secondly yes he did pay he just didn't pay the thieving feds he paid the state of Nevada which is what he feels is the correct choice.

Stop paying the bank that holds your mortgage and start sending the payment to a bank you like better. See if they don't repo your trailer.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 23, 2017, 03:01:40 AM
I think before the Bundy's run around accusing every aspect of the US government of lying, cheating and screwing them over, maybe they should get their act together. Like someone else said, there are better hills to die on if your a libertarian.

I'm not a libertarian. But I am an American and a veteran, and I have a very low opinion of any organization or individual who thinks that the best and appropriate way to air their grievances is to occupy a government facility while armed. You do that and lose, you face the consequences and they should be dire. You do it and win, you get to make new rules. Tell me how sympathetic you all would be if a bunch of armed native Hawaiians tried to "take back" k-bay or pearl harbor.

I get some people have issues with the government, but Jesus find a better martyr than snowflakes like the Bundy's occupying our collective land and treating it like it's their personal property all the while ducking their grazing fees. I promise there are far greater injustices in this country than those people

 If the corrupt BLM, USFWS decided they were going to take your land, your livelihood, would you curl up in a little ball and let them have it.




http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,212806.0.html

Wolf bait/long shot:

The criminals in question AKA the Bundy’s didn’t take anyone’s land.  They tried taking EVERYONE’s land.   Can you comprehend the difference?  And this was after they didn’t pay their grazing fees to us.  The owners of the land.
     Don’t try to obfuscate this.  It’s not that complicated.  They are law breaking scum and should be locked up.  Not venerated or celebrated.


In case you missed the latest....


Latest Bombshell: BLM Not Only Knew About The Bundy's Water Rights But Sought To Eliminate Them!


https://freedomoutpost.com/latest-bombshell-blm-not-knew-bundys-water-rights-sought-eliminate/
Modify message


https://redoubtnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/12.19-nevada-ryan-motion-to-dismiss-on-rugwell.pdf



DOJ to Review Bundy Case After Prosecution's Violations of Law


https://freedomoutpost.com/doj-review-bundy-case-prosecutions-violations-law/
Modify message



http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,212806.975.html
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: elkchaser54 on December 23, 2017, 10:54:51 AM
I love how you call what the bundy's did a "protest" covered by the 1st amendment... There must be a section in it that covers taking over a public federal building and heavily arming yourself against anyone coming to take it back.  How do you not see a difference between that and a womens march in Seattle?
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: slavenoid on December 23, 2017, 11:53:07 AM
I must be exercising my first and second amendment rights incorrectly. I have yet to enter into a standoff with federal agents or had to try and run a road block while being pursued. I'm such a failure...
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 23, 2017, 12:42:22 PM
Let's get this straight then, so all the companies who get large loans from the government, are welfare grabbers and are worthless companies. The government isn't in the business to make money off of criminal cases. It's not in the constitution. Bundys family has been grazing this land BEFORE the BLM even existed. Humptulips is 100% right. I think most on here listen to the mainstream, lying, fake news, media and make a decision on that. There are 2 sides to every story and the corrupt governments isn't truthfull. If you think they are funding their trucking company, which it's not, it's a heavy truck repair company, you better bitch about a lot of other free stuff the government hands out on our dime. Welfare, illegals, food stamps, section 8 housing, free transportation to name a few. This is what I mean that you crying babies on here don't know what you're talking about. Some of you don't know squat and rely on comments posted here.

Who came in a started rounding up and killing and burying the cattle in mass graves, the BLM, with Dan Love in charge.. Then the Bundys rallied against the corrupt government, with their LEGAL, 1st Amendment right to protest. Dan Love lost his job because of his military, SWAT actions against the Bundys. The Bundys had to be made an example out of this because of Dan Loves actions.
Dan Love didn't lose his job because of the Bundy's at all!

He lost his job because of the other BS he pulled. Handing out Native American artifacts as gifts to employees and friends, jacking up contracts and other requests at Burning Man, deleting emails and lying about statements (well there's a weird one). Dan Love was the subject of multiple Office of Inspector General investigations, none of which had to do with Bundy.


The artifacts were only an excuse to fire Love. They had to find something that wouldn't connect his firing to the Bundys.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 23, 2017, 01:24:13 PM
Let's get this straight then, so all the companies who get large loans from the government, are welfare grabbers and are worthless companies. The government isn't in the business to make money off of criminal cases. It's not in the constitution. Bundys family has been grazing this land BEFORE the BLM even existed. Humptulips is 100% right. I think most on here listen to the mainstream, lying, fake news, media and make a decision on that. There are 2 sides to every story and the corrupt governments isn't truthfull. If you think they are funding their trucking company, which it's not, it's a heavy truck repair company, you better bitch about a lot of other free stuff the government hands out on our dime. Welfare, illegals, food stamps, section 8 housing, free transportation to name a few. This is what I mean that you crying babies on here don't know what you're talking about. Some of you don't know squat and rely on comments posted here.

Who came in a started rounding up and killing and burying the cattle in mass graves, the BLM, with Dan Love in charge.. Then the Bundys rallied against the corrupt government, with their LEGAL, 1st Amendment right to protest. Dan Love lost his job because of his military, SWAT actions against the Bundys. The Bundys had to be made an example out of this because of Dan Loves actions.
Dan Love didn't lose his job because of the Bundy's at all!

He lost his job because of the other BS he pulled. Handing out Native American artifacts as gifts to employees and friends, jacking up contracts and other requests at Burning Man, deleting emails and lying about statements (well there's a weird one). Dan Love was the subject of multiple Office of Inspector General investigations, none of which had to do with Bundy.


The artifacts were only an excuse to fire Love. They had to find something that wouldn't connect his firing to the Bundys.


 :yeah:


Whistleblower: Federal Thug Behind Bundy Fiasco Had “Kill Book”

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/27612-whistleblower-federal-thug-behind-bundy-fiasco-had-kill-book#

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: bigtex on December 23, 2017, 04:29:16 PM
Let's get this straight then, so all the companies who get large loans from the government, are welfare grabbers and are worthless companies. The government isn't in the business to make money off of criminal cases. It's not in the constitution. Bundys family has been grazing this land BEFORE the BLM even existed. Humptulips is 100% right. I think most on here listen to the mainstream, lying, fake news, media and make a decision on that. There are 2 sides to every story and the corrupt governments isn't truthfull. If you think they are funding their trucking company, which it's not, it's a heavy truck repair company, you better bitch about a lot of other free stuff the government hands out on our dime. Welfare, illegals, food stamps, section 8 housing, free transportation to name a few. This is what I mean that you crying babies on here don't know what you're talking about. Some of you don't know squat and rely on comments posted here.

Who came in a started rounding up and killing and burying the cattle in mass graves, the BLM, with Dan Love in charge.. Then the Bundys rallied against the corrupt government, with their LEGAL, 1st Amendment right to protest. Dan Love lost his job because of his military, SWAT actions against the Bundys. The Bundys had to be made an example out of this because of Dan Loves actions.
Dan Love didn't lose his job because of the Bundy's at all!

He lost his job because of the other BS he pulled. Handing out Native American artifacts as gifts to employees and friends, jacking up contracts and other requests at Burning Man, deleting emails and lying about statements (well there's a weird one). Dan Love was the subject of multiple Office of Inspector General investigations, none of which had to do with Bundy.


The artifacts were only an excuse to fire Love. They had to find something that wouldn't connect his firing to the Bundys.
Ah yes. Because everything has to be a conspiracy right?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 23, 2017, 06:53:27 PM
Let's get this straight then, so all the companies who get large loans from the government, are welfare grabbers and are worthless companies. The government isn't in the business to make money off of criminal cases. It's not in the constitution. Bundys family has been grazing this land BEFORE the BLM even existed. Humptulips is 100% right. I think most on here listen to the mainstream, lying, fake news, media and make a decision on that. There are 2 sides to every story and the corrupt governments isn't truthfull. If you think they are funding their trucking company, which it's not, it's a heavy truck repair company, you better bitch about a lot of other free stuff the government hands out on our dime. Welfare, illegals, food stamps, section 8 housing, free transportation to name a few. This is what I mean that you crying babies on here don't know what you're talking about. Some of you don't know squat and rely on comments posted here.

Who came in a started rounding up and killing and burying the cattle in mass graves, the BLM, with Dan Love in charge.. Then the Bundys rallied against the corrupt government, with their LEGAL, 1st Amendment right to protest. Dan Love lost his job because of his military, SWAT actions against the Bundys. The Bundys had to be made an example out of this because of Dan Loves actions.
Dan Love didn't lose his job because of the Bundy's at all!

He lost his job because of the other BS he pulled. Handing out Native American artifacts as gifts to employees and friends, jacking up contracts and other requests at Burning Man, deleting emails and lying about statements (well there's a weird one). Dan Love was the subject of multiple Office of Inspector General investigations, none of which had to do with Bundy.


The artifacts were only an excuse to fire Love. They had to find something that wouldn't connect his firing to the Bundys.
Ah yes. Because everything has to be a conspiracy right?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk



It's not and you know it. Just keep voting for Hitlery and you'll be happy.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 23, 2017, 11:22:22 PM
Since some of you guys hate the feds and federal land so much, would it be safe to assume we won't find you hunting on it in the fall?
Of course they still use federal land. It's kind of like how Ammon Bundy doesn't recognize the federal government but took out a half million dollar federal small business loan in 2010.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk



7 years before for his trucking business. What's that have to do with the ranching and the corrupt BLM killing cattle and snipers threatening his fathers ranching standoff ? Nothing.
It absolutely does!

He says he doesn't believe in the feds. I'm pretty sure he had that belief in 2010. So if he doesn't believe in the feds why take out a half million dollar loan from the same entity you don't believe exists?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
:yeah:

The Bundy family is nothing more than a large welfare family. They want to graze on MY public land for free. They want MY tax money so they can fund their trucking business.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
BS go peddle your they want to do this for free elsewhere! :nono:
First off they, owned the land way before Unconstitutional BLM came into being. Secondly they had permits for the grazing of which they shouldn't have to have in the first place since they already owned the land to begin with, but for sake of argument it was the BLM who over time began reneging on their own stupid permit deal to begin with. It's not your public land anyhows it's Govt owned and we only get certain privileges to use at certain times, and still end up paying for again with their messed up fees and times we can use it anyhow.
Thirdly go check out what I and wolfbait posted in the Finicum murder thread. It shows confirmation that the Govt had knowledge that the Bundy's had permits but lied under oath inorder to try and convict them of these bogus charges.

Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 23, 2017, 11:33:50 PM


First off you don't pay usurpers. Secondly yes he did pay he just didn't pay the thieving feds he paid the state of Nevada which is what he feels is the correct choice.

Stop paying the bank that holds your mortgage and start sending the payment to a bank you like better. See if they don't repo your trailer.
:chuckle:
I/we own our home and never  had a bank loan so there  :chuckle:
Secondly didn't say anything about banks I was talking about usurping Govt thugs making up their own rules as they go along, but never live by their own rules to begin with.
Constitution never allowed for all these ABC Govt. agency's, anything that's been added in since whenever has been nothing but an usurpation of Govt overreach.
banks are nothing but heartless thieves worst darned thing Wilson did was to make the federal reserve and IRS. :twocents:
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 23, 2017, 11:57:09 PM
I love how you call what the bundy's did a "protest" covered by the 1st amendment... There must be a section in it that covers taking over a public federal building and heavily arming yourself against anyone coming to take it back.  How do you not see a difference between that and a womens march in Seattle?
First off check your history book on another similar case where a bunch of black people took over a BLM or some kind of public land in the 70's. From what I read about that case they were being screwed over. They decided to go and set up camp at the place in question and without guns were almost instantly hauled off. If Bundy and bunch hadn't of had guns at Malheur they would of never made it as long as they did. Which is exactly what Ammon Bundy had said in his Oregon Trial.
Adverse possession I think is what Bundy had planed in Oregon.
Secondly the protest was against the Govt making the Hammonds go back and serve fiver years for something they never should of been charged of in the first place. The taking over the Refuge was to be an adverse possession case, of where they set up camp but this time had guns to back themselves up and when enough time passed they would of had possession of and then return that land to the state of Oregon as it's supposed to be.
The first amendment gives us all the right to make a grievance against Govt atrocities, it doesn't nor should it define how that is done.
I'd add Wounded knee in the 70's but that was a big liberal operation, but still they had guns. Holder ex DOJ had a armed stand off back when he was in college. Armed stand offs aren't new and are very much a part of who and what we are.
Brown at harpers ferry just before the civil war also comes to mind. Armed stand offs while are to only be used as a last resort are often the only way some people who have exhausted all other avenues have.
Bundy had in my opinion had exhausted all his other options.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 23, 2017, 11:59:45 PM
These trials are not about the land, who owns it or whether the Federal Government should own it.
They are about your right to protest. It seems OK for Black Lives Matter, Antifa and the like to protest, even destroy public and private property but a bunch of country folk want to protest they find themselves in jail.
It doesn't matter what kind of crazy ideas the Bundy's may have. They have the right to peaceably assemble and protest.
For those who don't like that they had guns it has never been proven they used them for anything more then an assertion of their Second Amendment rights.
Now it seems the Feds have conspired to deny them a fair trial.
I hope they dismiss all charges.
pretty much yeah but I'd say the Govt is on the take that they are the ones who should own it and are willing to do what ever to do so, but yeah. I'd add that's what the second amendment is about too.
Whether people like it or not it's a human right that no majority, Govt, or people who want civilized behavior have a right to deny. The right to rebel goes deeper than peace and safety.
Once Govt, or majority's cross that line with their agendas, etc... we all have the right to rebel against what ever it is we as humans find oppressive.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 24, 2017, 06:18:00 AM
Our 2A rights are to protect US from OUR Government.That's what the Bundys were exercising at the refuge.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: Stein on December 24, 2017, 03:44:44 PM
I don’t recall the provision in any amendments that justify common theft.  Just because you say it is yours doesn’t change the facts.  It blows my mind that people they stole from are cheering them on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: NRA4LIFE on December 24, 2017, 03:54:03 PM
Thank you Stein. That is what it was, common thievery.  No other explanation.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 24, 2017, 06:44:32 PM
I don’t recall the provision in any amendments that justify common theft.  Just because you say it is yours doesn’t change the facts.  It blows my mind that people they stole from are cheering them on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
what'd they steal? Nothing! IT's the Govt that killed their cows and were trying to steal them!
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 24, 2017, 06:52:42 PM
Our 2A rights are to protect US from OUR Government.That's what the Bundys were exercising at the refuge.
:yeah:
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 24, 2017, 07:55:01 PM
I don’t recall the provision in any amendments that justify common theft.  Just because you say it is yours doesn’t change the facts.  It blows my mind that people they stole from are cheering them on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Explain ? Our facts are coming at you pretty laid out, yet you still believe the corrupt government.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: fish vacuum on December 24, 2017, 08:26:39 PM


I/we own our home and never  had a bank loan so there  :chuckle:
Secondly didn't say anything about banks I was talking about usurping Govt thugs making up their own rules as they go along, but never live by their own rules to begin with.

You pointed out that Bundy paid the state of Nevada instead of the feds. What kind of crazy is required to think that will work? If you owe money to an agency or a business, you can't just make the payment to someone else and call it good. That shouldn't even need to be pointed out.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: h20hunter on December 24, 2017, 09:53:24 PM
Cool it.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: h20hunter on December 24, 2017, 09:59:32 PM
That's a broad warning. Not just you.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: CAMPMEAT on December 24, 2017, 10:00:19 PM
That's a broad warning. Not just you.


Thanks.....
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: KFhunter on December 24, 2017, 10:30:35 PM
just cleaned up the thread and am about to unlock it, next time the thread goes in the trash and people get booted.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 24, 2017, 11:57:00 PM


I/we own our home and never  had a bank loan so there  :chuckle:
Secondly didn't say anything about banks I was talking about usurping Govt thugs making up their own rules as they go along, but never live by their own rules to begin with.

You pointed out that Bundy paid the state of Nevada instead of the feds. What kind of crazy is required to think that will work? If you owe money to an agency or a business, you can't just make the payment to someone else and call it good. That shouldn't even need to be pointed out.
He shouldn't have to to begin with.
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: wolfbait on December 25, 2017, 05:39:35 PM
LATEST BOMBSHELL: BLM NOT ONLY KNEW ABOUT THE BUNDY’S WATER RIGHTS BUT SOUGHT TO ELIMINATE THEM!


http://thewashingtonstandard.com/latest-bombshell-blm-not-knew-bundys-water-rights-sought-eliminate/
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: mfswallace on December 25, 2017, 10:37:55 PM
LATEST BOMBSHELL: BLM NOT ONLY KNEW ABOUT THE BUNDY’S WATER RIGHTS BUT SOUGHT TO ELIMINATE THEM!


http://thewashingtonstandard.com/latest-bombshell-blm-not-knew-bundys-water-rights-sought-eliminate/

This can't be true, gov't agencies are here to repress, I mean represent us....
Title: Re: Here's What The Prosecutors in the Bundy Ranch Case Didn't Want the Court To See
Post by: csaaphill on December 26, 2017, 05:52:33 PM
yeah always oppress, suppress, lie, steal, maim, kill, and tell you it's for our good. To think this is just the short list.  :yike:
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal