Posted on 04/16/2014 9:56:23 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Try to listen to Mark Levin's 1st hour from yesterday. It is very eye opening.
Mark definitely get's to the central point -- it is a direct abuse of power by the Feds.
Mark masterfully exposed the evils of those in government. He goes through the actions of the Feds over the past few decades that lead up to the events of the past few weeks.He says that he would not advise those to ignore a court order but he says the greater evil is the abuse of power.
I concluded that Mark admires Bundy for standing up to an abusive government.
The courts have ruled against him at every stage.
Yeah, the “courts”.
Blah, blah, blah.
The law is a religion practiced by priests (lawyers) and bishops (judges) according to the papacy (SC)
****************
At its best, law is a weapons system. Anyone who is a practitioner in it realizes that all of our current man made laws are written on wax. The law says what it means and means what it says until it doesn’t. It is a game.
At its worst, it is a racket.
How is it reasonable for BLM to restrict herd size so much that Bundy would lose 90% of his herd? From 500 to 150, plus his water rights.
BLM and ‘Biodiversity’ (Soros) wants to put the guy out of business.
Bump for later evisceration of a clueless fool
The law is on Bundy’s side - strictly speaking. Nevada grazing law says that Bundy, by historic use, has a grazing easement on the land, regardless of who owns the dirt. This easement includes the forage and the water, and is similar to mineral rights in that they can be held separately from the real estate.
Bundy’s rights were established before the feds took possession of the land - the transfer of the land from the state to the feds did not end his grazing easement. He needs to start making his case based on Nevada range law and grazing easements. His rights have nothing to do with whether or not the feds own 80% of the land - his grazing easement supersedes the federal ownership. They do not have the authority to charge him for rights or easements he already owns - which is why they claim payment for “management”. However, they are supposed to manage it to maximize grazing - and they haven’t been doing that - which is why Bundy stopped paying them. They have no right to “manage” the grazing without his consent - and if they aren’t doing the job he was paying them for, i.e. managing HIS forage for maximum grazing capacity, he has every right to stop paying them.
He has the law on his side, if he and his attorneys would argue the proper laws.
It is very frustrating. It just goes to show how dumbed-down some Americans have become regarding the Constitution. The Constitution has been abused and trampled on for at least 100 years and replaced with statism, especially from the radical progressives of the last half century. Statism is much more important for these people and to hell with individual liberties and freedoms.
CGato
Please see post #21 of this thread. Also, try to listen to Mark Levin's opening segment from yesterday.
The Feds are wrong. Bundy is in the right. Levin masterly explains the devious acts of the left that led directly to Bundy's action.
Mark speaks of context. Bundy is standing up to a very abusive government.
Please keep in mind that the Obama government has padded the courts with judges that rule in their favor.
RE: Nevada grazing law says that Bundy, by historic use, has a grazing easement on the land, regardless of who owns the dirt.
OK, that’s Nevada law, what does Federal Law say? And which law trumps which in this country according to the constitution?
see Post #21 and please listen to Mark Levin's first segment from yesterday.
If you do, you will clearly see that your comment will apply to those in power, not to Bundy.
The Feds are abusing their power. Bundy is standing up to naked tyranny.
Levin masterfully gives context and background of the actions of the Feds that led up to Bundy's actions.
Levin's 1st segment is very eye opening.
What “law” did Bundy break?
Should Christians submit to unjust laws, by tangential logic? How about ex post facto laws, by another tangent?
They fail not just as American but as higher primates. Laws are to serve the needs of people. People are not to serve the ‘needs’ of law.
Alter or abolish the corrupt law, and the corrupt law giver.
Why can't Bundy graze his cattle on the proposed offset like he has for years?
...the EPA & BLM were not worried about the damn turtle before the Solar First project.
Cooke is an apparatchik.
If frustrates me to no end to see Conservatives say the courts have ruled.
It allows them to not investigate the issue any further.
People need to see that many in black robes are rabid statist tyrants.
An abusive government which at the end of the day still has the law on its side.
Perhaps. But this has been going on for years and he's lost every single time it went to court.
Nevada law trumps. It is within their borders, their laws regarding real estate and grazing rights and water rights etc. are THE law. The feds have no jurisdiction. To verify this, ask your self why the BLM charges grazers “management fees” instead of rent.
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.