[cloudmountain]

He’s been lawyered up for over 20 years as he has battled these a-holes. It’s not federal property.

TWENTY years of this nonsense?? Geez he is more of a moron that I had previously thought.

If the Texas lawyers can't take care of it in three years, then there is SOMEthing else going on. Or the lawyers down there are getting rich off of the biggest sucker they've had the good fortune to meet in many a year.

Not federal property? That's what been said on these threads for the past few days. I guess the FReepers are all wrong. I don't really care.

The feds aren't the aholes; neither is Bundy. The feds are doing their job and Bundy is getting out of paying for grazing on land that he doesn't own. It's not rocket science or anything more dramatic than a CHEAPSKATE who doesn't want to pay his bills.

Don't make this Shakespearean. It's quite mundane: cheapskate versus Uncle Sam. Gee, guess who's going to lose. Rhetorical

[Fledermaus]

Sorry, you’re wrong. But I’m glad you feel you are the only FReeper with a brain.

[skeeter]

Do you in some way shape or form receive a paycheck from any government entity?

You sure think like someone who does.

[kiryandil]

cloud, you're like a zit that won't pop.

Your schtick isn't as sophisticated as most that I've seen.

Do you think it serves?

[PraiseTheLord]

What an idiot.

Just how UNINFORMED can one idiiot be ?????

ORRRRR ~~~~~ are you some kind of obot troll ?????????

[MamaTexan]

If the Texas lawyers can't take care of it in three years

It's Nevada, not Texas

----

Not federal property?

You do realize federal property isn't OWNED by the government, don't you? It's held in delegated trust.

-----

The feds are doing their job and Bundy is getting out of paying for grazing on land that he doesn't own.

Seriously? Do you realize that by 'doing their job' they've manipulated the Terms and Conditions of the grazing contract to the point Bundy would lose ALL the rights to his water by being forced to reduce his herd to a number LOWER than stipulated in his deed should he comply?

Some people call it "A Rock and a Hard Place"

The Founders called it Impairment of Obligation of Contract, and made it Unconstitutional under Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1 .

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, no. 44