LAWLESS militia aids rancher in collecting WELFARE from taxpayers!

The federal government controls that land. It's use is controlled by Congress. Even Fox news legal analysts have stated that Bundy doesn't have a legal leg to stand on

 

Again, No one OWNS the land. You keep dancing around that FACT.

Why bring up FOX news? Bundy lost his legal battles--that's a given. This is not a matter of left-versus right. Only ideological drones try to make it so. The issue as I see it is the governments over-the-top response. All the government need do is to attach a lien on the property-- not steal the man's livelihood by showing up at his doorstep with an Army. Why strong arm Bundy with military resources over BLM land use when those resources would be better utilized to protect America's best interest on our BLM land at our border with Mexico? Why has this administration surrendered BLM land use to Mexican drug cartels and illegal aliens? They don't pay to use the land either? This administrations is out of control with its picking which laws to enforce, making up laws as it sees fit, not enforcing the laws equally and its constant overstepping and overreaching of its authority. The people who showed up at Bundy's property to keep the government at bay did just what our founders expected the people to do with a tyrannical government. Good on them. Now it will be interesting to see just what the government will do next. That action will be the defining fact as to what kind of America we have under this administration.

 

The butthurt is strong with this one. Can non-Whites also be rednecks? My rural, midwest upbringing has the answer: YES.

 

Find out what "mitigation" is and why, according to the BLM's own web site (before it was scrubbed), they said that the Golden Butte would be ideal if grazing cows could be removed from the area.

Then look at Harry Reid's sudden zeal to get Cliven Bundy out of the picture. It isn't hard to connect the dots if you know what the facts are and
have at least a double digit I.Q.

 

You keep stating this, but you are in error. The Federal Government controls this land in trust to the people of the U.S. The Constitution clearly gives the Congress the power to regulate the usage of that land. This is long settled Constitutional Law.

 

Did the BLM have the proper fencing and signage? It makes a big difference.

Unless the land was fenced along with the proper signage, they had no right to do what they did. Legally all they could do is drive the cattle back on to Bundy's property, not coral them causing harm.

 

Anyone with at least a double digit IQ knows that this is just a red herring. Fact is it's not his land, he hasn't paid the fees to use it, and has no right to it. End of story.

 

The issue is Harry Reid's duplicity in this matter.
Either counter the facts I presented or see your way out of the thread. Ironically it's you who are waving the red herrings around here.

 

Didn't you know? The leftist apologists here have decided that only Cliven Bundy can break the law. Apparently the BLM is immune and can do whatever it likes.

 

I already posted facts that counter your claims. I have posted multiple sources showing that the plan for the Chinese facility is outdated, no longer happening, and not even close to rancher's location. I also posted multiple sources showing that the facility that IS planned for there is also not in the same area.

And again, I don't NEED to counter your "facts," because it's a red herring. You apparently have no idea what a red herring is. A red herring is a claim who's validity is irrelevant to the actual argument. The issue is NOT Harry Reid - the issue is the legality of this rancher using Federal land. Whether or not Harry Reid is involved with things does not change the fact that this rancher is on land that is not his and is not being paid for by him. They've taken legal actions against him multiple times, and he's had plenty of chances to pay the fees he owes, which are the fees he must agree to in order to use that land. That's all there is to it. The right's rabid desire to try to drag solar plants into this is just hilarious and completely irrelevant.

 

We must assume you've chosen to ignore offsite mitigation even when the BLM itself stated their desire for it. How can people be dishonest with themselves? That's just weird.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/31/us-usa-china-reid-solar-idUSBRE87U06D20120831

- - - Updated - - -

here's the rub, IT AIN'T HARRY'S LAND. Those lands are public lands, not private real estate.

 

snopes? really? now we know that they are as slanted as a dog's broken back leg. I'd never use snopes for even a quote for a research paper. All snopes is good for is wiping your ass when business is done.

 

a not-so -new lie............I'd be willing to bet he pays more in income taxes, annually, than you earn in two years.
Cite and source for the above claim, that Bundy is a welfare recipient..........I bet his farm doesn't receive subsidies from uncle sammy

 

Yeah, if they ever had any integrity they erased it entirely now. They have the ability to update their "opinion" when it's proven false but they neglect to do so obviously out of political consideration. Nothing but an arm of the progressive disinformation machine now.

 

We must assume you don't care that this is a red herring. IT'S IRRELEVANT. It doesn't make Bundy any less of a criminal.

 

nope. He's not a criminal. But harry Reid and his boy sure are.....trying to sell public lands to a foreign private investor.....
Methinks Bundy is the real red herring here.
Instead of standing against him, take up the cause for less government, eh?

 

lol, your posts are a joke. Thanks for the laugh.

 

well, funny be damned, we know where you stand...... with Harry, Pelosi, Feinstein, Holder, et al.

 

I stand with reality. You guys have gone off the deep end with this.

 

Yes that sort of reaction worked effectively for George III

 

Should I point out again that mitigation is not necessarily tied to the exact area where
some environmental degradation is supposed to occur?
It didn't seem to sink in the first time I mentioned it.

What a lucky thing for you.

Actually a red herring is a distraction introduced to an argument in order to derail it.
The distraction here is the idea that the man who cried crocodile tears over the plight of the poor desert tortoises because of Bundy's cows, and called the people that intervened when BLM goons broke the law "terrorists" has made himself part of this issue whether you disingenuously deny it or not.

No doubt Bundy has done some
dumb things....nevertheless Cliven Bundy has not invalidated his constitutional rights just because he owes the government money.
Especially considering the BLM's invasion of his property was illegal and counter to the court order they themselves had obtained.

Read the BLM's own posting on it's own website (that has been cited so many times here) that discusses using land in the Golden Butte region (where Bundy's ranch is located) to compensate for solar farms that are planned to come on line.
It's not my fault you don't seem to know much about this issue.

 

you refusal to look at the bigger picture is not my fault. Keep your eyes closed, it makes it easier to deny the actual facts. The BKM priced 35 other ranchers out of business so Reid could have the leasing Rights for public lands to allow China [ENN] to build a solar farm. Hell's bells, you want that there? None of this throws a red flag down on what Reid and his boy are trying to do?
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, eh?

 

Here's the reality you stand by.

 

blah blah blah. Not his land. The end.