It's About The Land

It was never about “grazing fees”, it’s always about the land. Every dirty trick in the book to drive people of their land. They want the ranch and the Bundys living dependent on the government.

The 3 judge panel from the 9th Circuit came to the correct conclusion, disallowing the bureaucrats from resurrecting the persecution of these citizens in attempts to force them out of their way of life. It should have ended with the original ruling, but it didn’t. And it won’t end here.

The judges found Navarro properly identified violations of “recognized statutory or constitutional” rights, and she had the authority to punish the government “to deter future illegal conduct.”

Violations of rights.

Cliven Bundy’s attorney, conservative activist Larry Klayman, said evidence showed government agents “threatened the Bundys’ lives, killed their cattle, assaulted family members and perpetrated tyrannical executive power over them.”

6 years in court. This time.

What happened to this country?

https://www.foxnews.com/us/us-appeals-court-denies-bid-to-resurrect-bundy-standoff-case

2 Likes

How do feel about eminent domain?

Kelo vs New London?

1 Like

“threatened the Bundys’ lives, killed their cattle, assaulted family members and perpetrated tyrannical executive power over them.”

Terroristic threats, assault, abuse of animals.

2 Likes

A link or a news article you’re quoting from would be helpful.

1 Like

His lawyer said that. and of course will embellish
to the nth degree …What evidence shows the Government threatened his life? Except maybe where the airsoft militia wanted to play soldier.

There is so much about this that has been hashed over since that. Are you saying the truth is not the truth? I am amazed at you question Mr. Hindsight.

Sounds to just like russian collusion of the left response to our innocent President. There is a power hungry part of our government that tramples on rights and innocence to impose their power.

Thank you, my brother.

1 Like

Thank you.

How do you not feel about eminent domain? That is the real question.

According to his lawyer.

And I guess they should have just thrown the Bundy’s in unmarked minivans. Seems to be all the rage these days.

2 Likes

Oh they can do better than that, how about they just pose as a documentary crew instead?

2 Likes

Government going undercover to investigate…never heard of such a thing …:roll_eyes::roll_eyes::roll_eyes:

undercover investigation =/= grabbing people off the streets.

From the OP Link

The judges said they found “a serious constitutional violation based on choices made by the government."

U.S. Attorney Nicholas Trutanich in Las Vegas said he respected the decision; noted the appeals court called it “a difficult and trying case;" and pointed to a footnote in which the appeals court judges said “misjudgments" by prosecutors did not rise to professional misconduct.

Emphasis mine. Sounds familiar.

The Bureaucracy protecting itself.

Then, your honors, what does it rise to the level of? Stupidity?

Serious Constitutional violations that do not rise to the level of professional misconduct committed by people sworn to uphold the Constitution.

And this is supposed to make sense?

1 Like

Seems like some people breaking laws is just fine.

Maybe the feds should open up other federal lands, for people to use for their personal or professional use, and not have to pay any kind of fees.

1 Like

What would you have done, to get them to follow the law?

Great find. Get them drinking and talking. 57 years for that. Outstanding.

Yea…I should be able to waltz down to my local park and plant a corn field.

1 Like