[norwaypinesavage]

Apparently “The Blaze” hasn’t seen documents on this site and others from the BLM web site (now removed) indicating that the Bundy land was to be used as an “offset” to allow the ChiCom purchase. Meanwhile, even though the ChiCom purchase is off, the Reid desire to make a killing by utilizing this offset might still find a buyer.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Yeh the Blaze needs to keep up. There are docs that specifically name Bundy as having to go.

[where's_the_Outrage?]

You have a link to these offset documents? Yes I know you said removed, but someone normally saves them.

[opentalk]

Beck is interviewing Bundy on his radio show now, twisting some of his words..Beck and his side kick seem out of touch on this with their own narrative.

Bundy needs to keep correcting their statements.

[Servant of the Cross]

Apparently “The Blaze” hasn’t seen documents on this site and others from the BLM web site (now removed) indicating that the Bundy land was to be used as an “offset” to allow the ChiCom purchase.

Bump that. I don't get the Blaze 'doubling down' on this either. Each of their seven Q&A's indict their 'intentional ignorance' further .....

7. Does Sen. Harry Reid have a connection to the Bureau of Land Management?

His former senior policy adviser is head of the BLM. It doesn’t get any more direct than that. Duh!

6. Is Harry Reid working with the Chinese to force the Bundys out?

Intentionally stupid question. The Chinese will be not be visible in this even if it is the offset for the shelved Laughlin deal. Previously, the Blaze completely ignored the difference between Gold Butte and Laughlin, now they’re pretending that since the Laughlin deal is “over” so is any other potential offset deal? FAIL.

5. So Who Owns the Land in Question?

Again, an irrelevant question. Yes, the government owns the land, but Bundy (and his family for >100 years), supported by the Governor of the state of Nevada [told us] that Bundy had paid every ounce of state tax, met the state requirements, and their family had been improving the property more than 100 years previous.

4. Did Mr. Bundy ever recognize federal authority and pay grazing fees?

As noted above, yes.

3. Is the Bundy cattle fight really all about a desert tortoise?

They did so--or so we were told--for the reason of protecting the desert tortoise. But then it was revealed that the Bureau of Land Management had shot far more desert tortoises than the Bundy cattle had even possibly destroyed.

2. Were the ranchers really chased off and forced into bankruptcy?

The dispute began in 1993, when the BLM interfered with Bundy’s grazing rights, citing protection of the Mojave Desert tortoise. It is not clear how cattle are a threat to the tortoise. As Dave Barry would say, “I am not making this up.” They capped his herd to 150 animals on a 250-square-mile rangeland allotment. When Bundy saw his grazing fees were no longer being used to help ranchers, but to thwart them, he stopped paying monthly federal land fees of $1.35 per cow-calf pair, insisting that local government, not the BLM, should be in control of the lands. Bundy claims that other ranchers were bought out by the federal government. He is now the last remaining rancher left on a 600,000-acre portion of land known as Gold Butte, managed by the BLM.

1. Did the Feds Overreact?

There must be a reason the Blaze is so myopic in its stupidity. And it must be a very disturbing reason to conservatives.

[tophat9000]

The article does in fact mentions the offset but seem to be oblivion to connecting a very obvious dot
The concept is simple..
I can do this on this piece of land A if I can offset its impact on it by reserving piece of land B..your just trading two pieces of land for different uses they do not need to be continuous.
The second point its all federal land because they bought is from Mexico..well they also bought the Louisiana Purchase. And also bought Florida.so does the federal government 80 % of the in those area?

Also note lower in the story that Clark County, not the Fed, was the one buying back grazing right on the other rancher..so if it fed land why is the county buying and selling the grazing rights?