Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nevada Rancher: “I did not graze my cattle on United States property”
GlennBeck.com ^ | Monday, Apr 14, 2014

Posted on 04/14/2014 1:25:37 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum

Glenn will give additional analysis on this interview on tonight’s Glenn Beck Program on TheBlaze TV.

Over the weekend, the ongoing conflict between Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), a federal agency that administers public land, came to a seeming conclusion when the BLM stood down and released Bundy’s cattle over safety concerns for their people on the ground. Some fringe media sites had been promoting the conflict as the possible beginning of a second American Revolution or the start of the “American Spring”. Glenn, however, has refused to do more than report the facts as he understood them until he could speak with Bundy. He did, however, author a letter denouncing any supporters of Bundy who were calling for armed conflict and violence, imploring people to follow the example of Martin Luther King and Gandhi and protest peacefully.

This morning on radio, Glenn spoke with Bundy about the escalating conflict and why Bundy has refused to pay grazing fees associated with his use of the public land.

“The story of Cliven Bundy, and his ranch in Nevada, is one that I think is captivating many Americans. And it may indeed go down in American history as more than just a quick footnote. I hope that it would go down in history as a positive footnote. But it is one of those situations where we could face another Waco or another really bad situation, a Ruby Ridge,” Glenn said.

During the interview, Glenn tried to understand Bundy’s perspective on the dispute. Was this conflict over ranching and grazing fees? Or was it over an issue of state sovereignty or disarming the BLM?

Glenn said, “I have people that graze on my land. And there is national land behind my ranch as well. And I know if anybody runs cattle on that, they also have to pay for grazing fees. Grazing fees are normal. And you stopped paying them. Your daughter said you did pay them for a while and then you stopped paying them. There are some people that would say that you are, if I may quote, a ‘welfare rancher’ because you’re not paying the fees that other ranchers do have to pay.”

“Let’s make sure we get this straight. I would pay my grazing fees to the proper government and I did try to pay my grazing fees to the proper government. I do not have a contract with the United States because I will not sign that contract with the United States,” Bundy explained. “I have no contract. I did not graze my cattle on the United States property. And I would pay my grazing fees to the proper government.”

Glenn asked him to clarify since in the Nevada State Constitution that land Bundy’s cattle are grazing on was given over to the federal government.

Below is a transcript of Bundy’s explanation:

CLIVEN: Let’s talk about the — Glenn, I really want to talk about that because that’s very important. You’re talking about the Enabling Act of the people of the territory of the state of Nevada. And remember, in the — section of the Constitution, we’re talking about territories of Nevada. Let me see if I can get that straight. What it says, it says the United States Congress will have power to dispose of all rules and regulations within the territory. Now, let’s think what we’re doing. We’re talking about the territory of Nevada. People of the territory of Nevada. As they — they do not have the Constitution. They’re within the territory and Congress had an unlimited power to make all the rules and regulations. Okay. The people of the territory petitioned the United States Congress to make this a state. And they have a clouded title. So in order to clear their title, they give up their public domain — forever. It sounds terrible. Forever? But let me tell what you they had to do. They had to give it up forever so Congress would have a clear title.
And what did Congress do? It made a state of Nevada. Which [indiscernible] a lot of them — quote Ed Presley here. Here’s what Ed Presley said. It doesn’t matter what happened before statehood. What matters is what has happened at the moment of statehood. Now, if you think about that in the second. At the moment of statehood. What happened? At the moment of statehood the people of the territory become people of the United States with the Constitution with equal footing to the original 13 states. They had boundaries around them, a state line. And that boundary was divided into 17 subdivisions, which were county. I live in one of those counties: Clark County, Nevada. And in that county, Clark County, Nevada, we elect our county commissioners, which is the closest to we the peoplend we elect the county sheriff and we pay him to do what? Protect our life, liberty and property.
I’m a citizen of that county. I abide by all the state laws.

Essentially, Bundy is saying this conflict isn’t inherently about grazing fees or water rights, but that he ultimately does not recognize the lands to be federal and the United States government or the BLM do not have jurisdiction on the land.

“So I think this is very clarifying to people,” Glenn said.

“It’s not BLM land. It’s Nevada land,” Bundy said.

“That is a different point of view than everybody else that is a rancher that I know,” Glenn said.

Based on the conversation on the radio show, Bundy’s fundamental issue isn’t with an out of control government taking control of his personal land, but that he disagrees with how that land became federal land when Nevada was founded in 1864.

Cliven did say that while he believes that Nevada is a sovereign state within the United States, he does not identify with the sovereign states movement.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: blm; bundy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

1 posted on 04/14/2014 1:25:37 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

BTTT


2 posted on 04/14/2014 1:26:01 PM PDT by ConservativeMan55 (In America, we don't do pin pricks. But sometimes we elect them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“All you property are belong to us now.”


3 posted on 04/14/2014 1:27:55 PM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

According to his family contracts from the 1800’s, it is NEVADA property.


4 posted on 04/14/2014 1:28:42 PM PDT by tcrlaf (Well, it is what the Sheeple voted for....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
“Let’s make sure we get this straight. I would pay my grazing fees to the proper government and I did try to pay my grazing fees to the proper government. I do not have a contract with the United States because I will not sign that contract with the United States,” Bundy explained. “I have no contract. I did not graze my cattle on the United States property. And I would pay my grazing fees to the proper government"...

....We’re talking about the territory of Nevada. People of the territory of Nevada. As they — they do not have the Constitution. They’re within the territory and Congress had an unlimited power to make all the rules and regulations. Okay. The people of the territory petitioned the United States Congress to make this a state. And they have a clouded title. So in order to clear their title, they give up their public domain — forever. It sounds terrible. Forever? But let me tell what you they had to do. They had to give it up forever so Congress would have a clear title. And what did Congress do? It made a state of Nevada....

....Based on the conversation on the radio show, Bundy’s fundamental issue isn’t with an out of control government taking control of his personal land, but that he disagrees with how that land became federal land when Nevada was founded in 1864.

PFL

5 posted on 04/14/2014 1:33:21 PM PDT by Alex Murphy ("the defacto Leader of the FR Calvinist Protestant Brigades")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

sokay..... the UN will likely TAKE..ownership before this is cleared up....

HOW ODD eh?

“So-called Non Government Organizations (but can we really call them such now that they are part of the government?) ..[.RE THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER...[ And select “law enforcement” officers such as the Clark County Nevada Sheriff, Doug Gillespie.


6 posted on 04/14/2014 1:33:56 PM PDT by MeshugeMikey ( "Never, never, never give up". Winston Churchill ..We WIll Remember Bunkerville!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Bundy is being his own worst enemy. He is grazing his cattle on United States Property, but the grazing and land managment laws are actually on his side and the BLM is improperly jacking up his fees and restricting his herds using the Desert Tortoise as a weapon against him.

He needs to get a lawyer and quit making dumb statements on television.


7 posted on 04/14/2014 1:34:51 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Were talking cow feed here.

Why should this producer pay anything to the feds after we paid the feds hundreds of billion to protect our sovereignty and borders, all while they aided and abetted tens of millions from Mexico to trespass on our lands?

Then the feds turn around and force us all to pay literally hundreds of billions more ANNUALLY to support them, feed them, house them, educate and hospitalize them?

Why are we paying hundreds of billions in taxes and fees annually for millions of illegal trespassers?

Why are we paying hundreds of billions in taxes and fees annually for millions of illegal trespassers?

Why are we paying hundreds of billions in taxes and fees annually for millions of illegal trespassers?

8 posted on 04/14/2014 1:38:35 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

And if you want to drive someone off, you don’t have to do it forcefully. You simply make it too expensive for them and drive them out of business.

I get the impression that is what happened. Only the last remaining rancher refused to be knocked down without fighting.


9 posted on 04/14/2014 1:40:22 PM PDT by dhs12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: centurion316
I tend to agree.

Bundy is in the right (generally) but has wacko legal theories given the current legal structure.

Now that the Law comes from the mouth of Bammy (unilateral 0bamaCare legal changes) and H0lder (WAY selective enforcement) and Reid (former aide Neil Kornze now Director of the BLM), why shouldn't hte Law come out of the mouth of Cliven Bundy?

Or any other American?

At ease. Do as you will.

10 posted on 04/14/2014 1:40:59 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Old Stinkface Harry is determined to get his way.

http://www.mynews4.com/news/local/story/Sen-Reid-on-Cattle-Battle-Its-not-over/nT5weKnqFkezV14I5GhESg.cspx


11 posted on 04/14/2014 1:41:05 PM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

Agreed. But I heard today that the statue of limitations has ended.


12 posted on 04/14/2014 1:42:16 PM PDT by dhs12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
He's effectively saying that the only authority he acknowledges is the county and that in his opinion - completely contrary to the actual facts - the land belongs to the county.

It does not.

He should probably quit with the strange legal theories and stick to the facts of the case: he was using federal land and abiding by the rules until the federal government changed the rules on him.

This posse comitatus kind of rhetoric is really unsound.

A better question is: why is the federal government continuing to hold onto so much land after more than 150 years? Why is it not sold at a market price to people like Mr. Bundy who are making good use of it?

13 posted on 04/14/2014 1:43:24 PM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

My guess is that he can’t get a lawyer because no competent lawyer would make those absurd arguments in federal court. The lawyer would probably have Rule 11 sanctions imposed for making an argument with no basis in fact or law. It’s not up to Cliven Bundy to interpret the Constitution as he sees fit - otherwise, don’t complain when a liberal judge does so.


14 posted on 04/14/2014 1:47:33 PM PDT by Lou Budvis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Who else wants to run cattle in the desert there?


15 posted on 04/14/2014 1:48:47 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lou Budvis
"It’s not up to Cliven Bundy to interpret the Constitution as he sees fit"

It's not up to Bammy to interpret the Constitution as he sees fit, but that doesn't seem to stop him.

Why should C liven be treated differently?

16 posted on 04/14/2014 1:51:11 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“After the 1934 act they continued to pay grazing fees and make improvements up until the 1990’s.

Somewhere along the way the Bureau of Land Management was created. I don’t know what year.

Around 1990 or so they told him that he could no longer graze more than 150 of his 600 or so head of cattle there.

He told them to pound sand and kept paying his fees and grazing his cattle.

Around 1994 they told him he could only graze them in the summer, fall and winter and said it was so that the cattle didn’t disturb the Desert Tortoise. (more on that later)

He told them that they were HIRED by the Taylor Grazing act to MANAGE the land for the ranchers. So he FIRED them and started paying his fees to to the state of Nevada. Soon they didn’t know where to put it so they quit taking payments.

Meanwhile they came at him from another angle. When they saw they weren’t going to be able to force him off the land the BLM SOLD the rights to the land to the state of Nevada under the condition that the state RETIRE the grazing rights permanently. Nevada legislators, being idiots, did their bidding. That was around 1996 or so.

But the state left him alone and let him forage all those years.

A few years ago, due to Agenda 21, Ranchers around the nation were being shut down and either bought out (with a program that paid them a lump sum of YOUR taxpayer funds in exchange for quitting ranching.

A lot of them did. The program was touted as “optional” but they intimidated the ranchers with lawsuits ranging from environmental concerns to water concerns to endangered species.

Before all this there were 50 ranchers in Clark County Nevada. Now there is one. Cliven Bundy.”

http://www.reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capitalism/comments/22ntn8/take_aways_from_the_ongoing_bundyranch_situation/cgoyftl


17 posted on 04/14/2014 1:52:35 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

18 posted on 04/14/2014 1:53:14 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
"A better question is: why is the federal government continuing to hold onto so much land after more than 150 years?"

Another good question is:

Why does the BLM get to make the Law and then have Rustler Reid's minion Director Neil Kornze enforce it?

19 posted on 04/14/2014 1:53:26 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dhs12345

Where is this statue?
Is it made of stone or bronze?


20 posted on 04/14/2014 1:53:45 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

So everybody can do whatever they want regardless of court orders? Don’t complain about anarchists, then.


21 posted on 04/14/2014 1:56:06 PM PDT by Lou Budvis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

“Left behind were trailers, generators, personal equipment scattered all over the ground and internal BLM documents left on the table where they had been branding the cattle.”

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2014/04/so-much-for-slow-day-just-got-off-phone.html


22 posted on 04/14/2014 1:57:27 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

Regulations and contracts written in disappearing ink, with new rules made up on the spot depending on whose cash flow was being tapped for the moment.

Golden Rule - them who has the gold makes the rules. Keeping them enforced, however, may take more gold than is easily available.

An evolving arrangement, mutating as we look at it.

By the way, the desert tortoise was never for a moment in any danger from cattle grazing. However, there may be considerable natural gas and petroleum beneath the surface lands, in a formation that can be opened up by hydraulic fracturing, “Fracking”. This alone is enough to set the enviro-weenies and greenies over the edge, that somebody might be able to extract huge supplies of energy and thus make this area into a boom growth location.


23 posted on 04/14/2014 1:58:02 PM PDT by alloysteel (Selective and willful ignorance spells doom, to both victim and perpetrator - mostly the perp.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MrB

LOL, the statue is clearly not in Clark County. Maybe it’s at the Mustang Ranch.


24 posted on 04/14/2014 1:59:02 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

Bingo.


25 posted on 04/14/2014 2:01:33 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel
"Keeping them enforced, however, may take more gold "

Or lotsa Pb, W & depleted U.

26 posted on 04/14/2014 2:02:35 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
He's right. The range rights given as an incentive to settle the West would be part of the conditions of the Deed contract signed by Bundy's forefather. These range, or land usage rights are inheritable, and the contract itself stipulates who the payment should be made to.

The fact the BLM tried to impair the obligation of this contract by stepping in the middle and demanding payment for the land based on a contract it was NOT a party to, is, itself, Unconstitutional.

Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1:
.......or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts

Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligation of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation.
James Madison, Federalist #44

27 posted on 04/14/2014 2:05:01 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MamaTexan

Thank You!


28 posted on 04/14/2014 2:06:55 PM PDT by TsonicTsunami08 (SEND BITCOIN 1CYfujvffxKKPHKvrQvLP3CDb3Z5Lu7LwM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lou Budvis
So, have you stopped Bammy from his illegal, unConstitutional actions?

No?

Why should any other American be treated differently?

I say we should cite Bammy's actions as precedence.

29 posted on 04/14/2014 2:08:06 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TsonicTsunami08
(grin)

You are most heartily welcome!

30 posted on 04/14/2014 2:09:04 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
Who else wants to run cattle in the desert there?

The 'issue' is quite the opposite.

The BLM does not want cattle on the land. There are environmental laws that have to do with live cattle and exposure to certain hazards on federal land WHEN the government sells or leases that land to foreign investors who want to use it for Solar Power, Water rights/control,Mining, or Drilling.

These cows are holding up the 'deal' that the Reid family is making with foreign investors. Harry himself went overseas to 'recruit' such deals (all legal and planned, and was his 'job' to perform). Our government is trading use or ownership of land in the US to China for all the money we borrowed from them.

Uncontrolled cows on the land requires an extensive Environmental Impact Statement and could halt the 'sale'.

No cows, no problem, Harry Reid's kid makes a fortune.

31 posted on 04/14/2014 2:09:23 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Lol. Statute.

Sorry.


32 posted on 04/14/2014 2:14:19 PM PDT by dhs12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Having spent some significant time over the decades in the Ariz./Nev./Cal. Desert Triangle in the heat of Summer, I'm amazed that cattle can actually survive there.

I was also surprised that some peeps manage to live out there (out of the bottom lands, unlike Cliven).

Let the peeps be. Washington, D.C. needs to be corralled and sold off.

33 posted on 04/14/2014 2:18:44 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Let me see if I have my facts straight:
1. BLM got this land to preserve and protect it for we, the people.
2. BLM is selling OUR land to the Chinese Communists to build a solar farm and a manufacturing plant.
3. Harry Reid and his son stand to make millions.
4. BLM wants the grazing to stop to protect the desert tortoise.
5. Grazing improves the habitat for the desert tortoise. So much, that the BLM is shooting the tortoises.
6. This ain’t over, folks. And it’s not going to end pretty.

Is that about it?


34 posted on 04/14/2014 2:19:44 PM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners. And to the NSA trolls, FU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

The Chinese foothold won’t just be for a solar plant.

They’ll bring in intelligence workers and MRAPs of their own, with the muscle to back up their ownership.


35 posted on 04/14/2014 2:20:27 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

I think Clive Bundndy’s family grazing rights were administered by Clark County before the BLM. Clive doesn’t set up the background very coherently.


36 posted on 04/14/2014 2:21:43 PM PDT by the_daug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MamaTexan

Lady, there are some real smart people on here, and you are one.
I go at it this way. Since Art 1 Sec 8 the 17th, states specifically what the federal government is allowed to do, and if the state of Nevada passed in its constitution violating that clause-being the 17th enumerated power, then the states constitution is in, that part, unconstitutional. They must amend it.
So, your point, is another way to go at them.
We now have our constitutional crisis. Where the hell is Kevin Gutzman? He is the only one I might refer to in this matter.


37 posted on 04/14/2014 4:12:23 PM PDT by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
“Let’s make sure we get this straight. I would pay my grazing fees to the proper government and I did try to pay my grazing fees to the proper government. I do not have a contract with the United States because I will not sign that contract with the United States,” Bundy explained. “I have no contract. I did not graze my cattle on the United States property. And I would pay my grazing fees to the proper government.”
This one sentence tells it all: he's a "freeman on the land" sovereign citizen type. He does not recognize the Constitution of the United States. He doesn't recognize the federal government. He thinks he has to have a "contract" before paying for grazing fees on federal land, which is patent nonsense.

All of this is known as pseudolaw and it's a common type of tax protester argument. This gives some basic information about these type of people. Probably believes the court order against him isn't valid because there was fringe on the flag in court (which they pretend makes that an admiralty court).

My new prediction: He hasn't paid his federal income tax in several years and he's about to get his butt audited.
38 posted on 04/14/2014 5:06:09 PM PDT by GAFreedom (Freedom rings in GA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crz
Thank you, you are quite kind. :-)

-----

Since Art 1 Sec 8 the 17th, states specifically what the federal government is allowed to do, and if the state of Nevada passed in its constitution violating that clause-being the 17th enumerated power, then the states constitution is in, that part, unconstitutional. They must amend it.

True, but the federal government also violated the Constitution when they accepted such land when it was for a purpose other than specified....i.e. for the purpose of buildings to provide for the common defense.

Joseph Story quotes Madison's Federalist #43 quite closely when he said§ 1219. The other part of the power, giving exclusive legislation over places ceded for the erection of forts, magazines, &c., seems still more necessary for the public convenience and safety. The public money expended on such places, and the public property deposited in them, and the nature of the military duties, which may be required there, all demand, that they should be exempted from state authority

Nowhere is there authorization for federal public lands for any other purpose.

39 posted on 04/14/2014 5:20:45 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: crz
Ack! Sorry! I forgot the link to Story's work:

Commentaries on the Constitution

40 posted on 04/14/2014 5:24:02 PM PDT by MamaTexan (I am a Person as created by the Laws of Nature, not a person as created by the laws of Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: GAFreedom
He thinks he has to have a "contract" before paying for grazing fees on federal land, which is patent nonsense.

You are correct about much of what he has said, but if fact, the BLM requires that he sign an agreement before he can pay is grazing fee. That is why he has not paid, the BLM will not let him pay. He refuses to agree to the terms and conditions which were changed drastically and would have the effect of putting him out of business. He probably has legal recourse to their heavy handed methods, but not with the arguments that he has been making.

41 posted on 04/14/2014 5:27:21 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MamaTexan

Quite alright. I have the book on the ratification debates et al.


42 posted on 04/14/2014 5:27:40 PM PDT by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: crz

So, “Around 1990 or so (the BLM) told him that he could no longer graze more than 150 of his 600 or so head of cattle there.”

If Bundy had agreed, he’d lose water rights...to the rest of his land(?)

Nevada votes in shutting grazing rights down permanently.

How Wouldn’t this force people out of business? For what purpose? A tortoise that feeds on cow manure?


43 posted on 04/14/2014 5:28:38 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots

The man needs a constitutional and contract lawyer.

A couple real good ones.

This..is a constitutional crisis in the making.

He needs to shut his mouth also.


44 posted on 04/14/2014 5:31:01 PM PDT by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: crz

Yes


45 posted on 04/14/2014 5:33:29 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: wideawake; E. Pluribus Unum
Don't pay for cows eating =

Big federal crime causing liberal outrage.

_________________________________________________________

25 million illegals choking off our social services, jobs, hospitals, jails =

Love and Democratic voters

46 posted on 04/14/2014 5:48:54 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“A secret administration memo has surfaced revealing plans for the federal government to seize more than 10 million acres from Montana to New Mexico, halting job- creating activities like ranching, forestry, mining and energy development. Worse, this land grab would dry up tax revenue that’s essential for funding schools, firehouses and community centers.

President Obama could enact the plans in this memo with just the stroke of a pen, without any input from the communities affected by it.”

http://linkis.com/wordpress.com/N2EEc


47 posted on 04/14/2014 6:00:12 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

ping


48 posted on 04/14/2014 6:13:06 PM PDT by ponygirl (Be Breitbart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

“he was using federal land and abiding by the rules until the federal government changed the rules on him.”

Yeah, that always sucks and can strongly motivate you.

“Why is it not sold at a market price?”

I think Dingy Harry (D-Nev) was trying very hard to do just that.


49 posted on 04/14/2014 6:13:11 PM PDT by Delta 21 (Its my freedom. YES. I will be keeping it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NTHockey

You have a firm grasp of the facts of this case.

Especially #6.


50 posted on 04/14/2014 6:18:32 PM PDT by Delta 21 (Its my freedom. YES. I will be keeping it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson