Posted on 02/10/2016 7:36:18 PM PST by ifinnegan
"I think what I'd do, as president, is I would make a phone call to whoever, to the group," he said, adding later, "I'd talk to the leader. I would talk to him and I would say, 'You gotta get out -- come see me, but you gotta get out.'"
"You cannot let people take over federal property," Mr. Trump said. "You can't, because once you do that, you don't have a government anymore. I think, frankly, they've been there too long."
Mr. Trump said he wasn't necessarily suggesting a large-scale military action, but that "at a certain point you have to do something and you have to be firm and you have to be strong, you have to be a government."
Public land? What was the government doing with this “Public” land?
I got this from and linked to the NY Times.
I did find the link from googling Trump and Malheur (I remembered ztrump’s comments). It returned the Kos page citing the interview and it had the link to the NY Times.
I linked to the NY Times.
FYI
NY Times link.
Don’t be stupid.
That is just a BS twist of what he said.
Your analogies don’t hold water, bramps. .
Here is a live feed from Malhuer.
Don’t be stupid, see 47 slick.
Generally peaceful protest doesn’t involve bringing weapons, and making statements to the effect, you’ll have to kill me to get me out of here.
==
These people are idiots not patriots
Reagan, when he was governor, met with students who had taken over an office. He held back the police, and went in himself. As I recall the story, he even sat on the floor with them to have the discussion.
I am conflicted over this situation.
I am sympathetic to the fact that the federal government has over-reached, exerts far too much control over what should be open lands, and has become a burden on the west. I am also concerned about the post release sentencing.
I also know that occupying even an unoccupied and empty government facility is an act which the people involved know will result in legal action. They specifically took an action they knew would generate a response, preferring to put a spotlight on what they, and many others, believe to be an injustice to the preservation of their own liberty.
There is no scenario under which the occupiers could reasonably believe they would walk out free men and women. At the very least an arrest, a court date, and a trespass warrant were in their futures.
I believe restraint is in order, absolutely. But free passage without consequence, walk out and go home, is not in the cards. There must come a point where their grievances can be aired, and the occupiers having made their point, peaceably end this. The only other option they have left is martyrdom.
I pray for wisdom and restraint on all sides, and a peaceful end without any further loss of life.
Thanks.
Well stated and you captured my thoughts as well.
I just see no reason for the FBI to force a fight nor for them to accept the FBI’s fight.
I do see this as peaceful civil disobedience.
I do wonder if the participants want blood shed.
George Washington - Whiskey Rebellion
Andrew Jackson - Nullification Crisis
Abraham Lincoln - Civil War
Donald Trump - ??????
...
Yes.
That's very commendable.
But why do we have lawyers/politicians lined up around D.C. willing to hand out prizes, gifts, benefits, and free medical to millions of foreigners who are also trespassing and handing us the bills.
In fact for many decades most all these lawyers and politicians have wanted to simply grant them amnesty and or make real easy for them. Literally coddle them.
Describing this as a glaring conflict of justice would be an understatement in my opinion.
I can’t disagree...
My point is that this crew chose to make a public and vocal stand through civil disobedience. They knew it would end eventually, and they knew it would end with badges involved.
That’s a choice people are allowed to make and I admire the strength of belief. However, I also believe that such foreknowledge of the eventual end to a deliberate act does place some burden on the occupiers to choose wisely the time and manner of the ending. It is somewhat imperative that they find a way to control the final act and ensure their message is heard. Otherwise they become the story, in life or not...
If ‘the point’ is truly their point, they will find a way to bring this down peaceably and keep the focus where they say it belongs...
Your ignorance is astounding. Grazing rights existed before “public lands” existed and in fact before the United States existed. They are paid for and sold from owner to owner and the government was never the owner.
Here is a good link to a full (long) story on the Hammond ranch issue for those that want to get educated. The land was settled and developed by ranchers, then 30 years later it was turned into a bird sanctuary by Teddy Roosevelt. The government has continued to acquire land over time.
Excerpts:
The Harney Basin (where the Hammond ranch is established) was settled in the 1870’s. The valley was settled by multiple ranchers and was known to have run over 300,000 head of cattle. These ranchers developed a state of the art irrigated system to water the meadows, and it soon became a favorite stopping place for migrating birds on their annual trek north.
In 1908 President Theodor Roosevelt, in a political scheme, create an “Indian reservation†around the Malheur, Mud & Harney Lakes and declared it “as a preserve and breeding ground for native birdsâ€. Later this “Indian reservation†(without Indians) became the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.
In 1964 the Hammonds’ purchased their ranch in the Harney Basin. The purchase included approximately 6000 acres of private property, 4 grazing rights on public land, a small ranch house and 3 water rights.
By the 1970’s nearly all the ranches adjacent to the Blitzen Valley were purchased by the US Fish and Wildlife Service.... The expansion of the refuge grew and surrounds to the Hammond’s ranch. Approached many times by the FWS, the Hammonds refused to sell. Other ranchers also choose not to sell.
During the 1970’s the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), in conjunction with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), took a different approach to get the ranchers to sell. Ranchers were told: “grazing was detrimental to wildlife and must be reducedâ€; 32 out of 53 permits were revoked and many ranchers were forced to leave. Grazing fees were raised significantly for those who were allowed to remain. Refuge personnel took over the irrigation system claiming it as their own....
.... The study showed the “no use†policies of the FWS on the refuge were causing the wildlife to leave the refuge and move to private property. The study showed the private property adjacent to the Malheur Wildlife Refuge produced four times more ducks and geese than the refuge. The study also showed the migrating birds were 13 times more likely to land on private property than on the refuge. When Susie brought this to the attention of the FWS and refuge personnel, her and her family became the subjects of a long train of abuses and corruptions.
In the early 1990’s the Hammonds filed on a livestock water source and obtained a deed for the water right from the State of Oregon. When the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) found out the Hammonds obtained new water rights near the Malhuer Wildlife Refuge, they were agitated and became belligerent and vindictive toward the Hammonds. The US Fish and Wildlife Service challenged the Hammonds right to the water in an Oregon State Circuit Court. The court found the Hammonds legally obtained rights to the water in accordance to State law and therefore the use of the water belongs to the Hammonds.*
In August 1994 the BLM & FWS illegally began building a fence around the Hammonds water source. Owning the water rights, and knowing that their cattle relied on that water source daily, the Hammonds tried to stop the building of the fence. The BLM & FWS called the Harney County Sheriff department and had Dwight Hammond (Father) arrested and charged with “disturbing and interfering with” federal officials or federal contractors (two counts, each a felony). Dwight spent one night in the Deschutes County Jail in Bend, and a second night behind bars in Portland. He was then hauled before a federal magistrate and released without bail. A hearing on the charges was postponed and the federal judge never set another date.
****************
The article continues with continued stuff thrown at the Hammonds by the Feds.
I thought you’d agree.
What we have here is selective justice. The other trespassers who also had a choice I referred to, cost Americans many hundreds of billions, leaving a landscape of dead and injured. They enforce only when it enforces their needs and motives.
Trump should not have opened up this issue.
More folks need to read their side of this. To bad it’s not required reading.
Wonder what the Native Indians on reservations are thinking now?
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.