One this to consider is that Bundy was not able to finance a lawyer so he represented his own case. My guess is that did not bring up the relevant issues.
In an earlier motion to dismiss, or something similar, Bundy hit on all of the relevant legal topics raised in Gardner.
In this case, I sincerely believe you would be better served by reading the federal court rulings and not filtering it through me. This will give you an idea of whether or not Cliven Bundy raised issues you deem to be relevant, and whether you believe Cliven Bundy received some some informed legal assistance.
U.S. v. Bundy, CV-S-98-531-JBR (RJJ) LEXIS 23835 (U.S. Dist. Ct. Nev. 1998
U.S. v. Bundy, No. 2:98-cv-531-LRH.
Others, especially FReepers have raised potential defenses not raised by Bundy. As a general rule, however, at the stage at which the court is enforcing remedies on a judgment, the losing party is not allowed to re-litigate issues he or she lost in the judgment, or to introduced legal theories that "dadgummit, I should have made that argument before the judgment."