I have read that story three times.
Paragraph one: focuses on new media giving 16 min of it in their broadcasts.
Paragraph two: focuses on how the rancher failed to pay his fees and the network journalists ‘they have failed to use the case to tell the larger story of how environmental rules — in this case, regulations to protect the desert tortoise, have been implemented in ways that help favored interests’.
Paragraph three: focuses on the interviews with the Bundy side and how he hasn’t paid his fees.
Paragraph four: Bundy family tells about intimidating forces of the feds.
Paragraph five: What’s ‘omitted from the network coverage: How cattle ranchers like Bundy have been victimized by federal government plans to protect the desert tortoise, and how the current showdown was provoked by an environmentalist lawsuit.’
Paragraph six: Networks not admitting regulations about tortoises.
Paragraph seven: ‘federal government has for decades permitted some destruction of tortoise habitats if they like the project, while cracking down on others as they see fit.’
Paragraph eight: ‘BLM has enforced these rules in ways that favor projects endorsed by federal bureaucrats, such as solar projects, while being tough on the cattle ranchers.’
Paragraph nine: Clinton sold land in favor of LV land developers.
So where in here does it tell of WHY he didn’t pay the fees!
It tells of why these regs are unfair, but WHY did he not pay fees that were a legal responsibility of his. Any lawyer will focus on that.
After all if you don’t like the law and break it you are not going to win. No matter how unfair it is.
I can sympathize with him but I cannot find his reason for not paying. Have read several articles.
A country or two have had beginnings about unfair, unjust, an unethical taxes or fees.