Posted on 02/18/2016 4:42:21 AM PST by HomerBohn
It's interesting, isn't it? Not one shot was fired by Cliven Bundy, his family or peaceful protestors, some of whom were armed during the 2014 Bundy Ranch siege by the Bureau of Land Management. Not one shot was fired by the Bundys or any of the people who took over the Oregon Wildlife Refuge either. The only people that we know of who have acted unlawfully and violent have been the DC government and those tied to it. It was those who work for the state that fired on an unarmed LaVoy Finicum, murdering him in cold blood, and then sought to kill the other passengers in his vehicle who never fired a shot. Yet, a federal judge has said following Cliven Bundy's arrest in Oregon last week, the Mr. Bundy must remain behind bars because he is "lawless and violent."
U.S. Magistrate Judge Janice Stewart claims that Bundy is a danger to the community there.
"If he is released and he goes back to his ranch, that is likely the last the government will see of him," Stewart said.
Bundy's sons, Ammon and Ryan, remain in jail over three weeks after their arrest, and so do several others, including Pete Santilli, who did several live reports to keep the public informed of exactly what was going on minute by minute.
According to the Associated Press:
Bundy's attorney, Noel Grefenson, said his client could not be a danger if authorities waited to charge him for 22 months. The judge dismissed that argument and set his next hearing for Friday.
A family member said the patriarch isn't dangerous or a criminal and should be released to live at home.
"Cliven believes in the proper role of government and proper jurisdiction. Where's the jurisdiction?" daughter-in-law Briana Bundy told The Associated Press by telephone from Bunkerville, Nevada.
"He's not a flight risk. This is his home. This is where his livelihood is," she said.
As with everything the DC government does, Bundy's arrest was calculated. He was arrested at the Portland airport where authorities knew he would be unarmed and there would not be a scene. They were just as calculated in both the ambush and the video footage of the shooting of LaVoy Finicum.
However, Bundy, unlike the others who have been arrested, did not received charges related to the standoff in Oregon, but rather is charged with unlawfully directing more than 200 followers to stop federal agents and contract cowboys who were attempting to enforce a court order to round up nearly 400 of his cattle at the Bundy Ranch siege in 2014.
The aftermath of that was just as telling concerning the lawless and criminal behavior of federal agents.
Prosecutors also allege the Bundy and those who stood with him set up traffic checkpoints on public roads and attempted to follow and intimidate federal agents trying to conduct plant surveys.
"Witnesses have described the level of threatened violence as so intense that something as innocent as the backfire of (a) vehicle, or someone lighting a firecracker, would have set off a firefight," according to a 34-page document filed by prosecutors Tuesday.
Prosecutors claimed that neither the Constitution nor any other law "gives anyone the right to use or carry, let alone brandish, raise or point, a firearm" at federal law enforcers performing official duties, "whether one thinks the officer is acting constitutionally or not."
Au contraire mon frere! Federal agents are not spelled even listed in the Constitution, but a citizen militia and their duties are.
The Congress shall have Power To ...provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.... - ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 16
As we have pointed out before, the laws of the union, contained in the Constitution regarding land were being dealt with peacefully and according to law. I will grant that Congress had not called up the militia, but I would also point out the that same section of the Constitution also states that Congress is to provide for the organizing, arming and disciplining of that militia, which they don't do because they do not want it to exist, but rather funnel unconstitutional spending to other interests. So, I ask, who really are the lawless and violent ones in this matter? Is it really Mr. Bundy and his sons, or is it a criminal DC government?
I assume the FBI and other such agencies are preparing to ARREST AND IMPRISON without bail all these dangerous terrorists also:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3398442/posts
A group of Harvard Law students have occupied one of the school’s halls, saying there is no space for marginalized students and staff on campus. The occupation, which began Monday night
Everybody should be calling the FBI to do Just That!!
Why arrest him in the first place?
The BLM is a bogus and deceitful organization, much like the rest of today’s central socialist government.
The state should kick them all out and admonish them never to return.
“Why arrest him in the first place?”
Because he opposed the government.
So the tyrants start to peel back the mask for the doubters to see what many have been trying to tell them for months...
Will be interesting to see if any of the doubters now begin to understand the magnitude of what this man and his family have been fighting.
Nope, wasn’t the “right time” to stand up to these pigs.
So when will the “right time” be?
From what I understand he's charged with conspiracy, obstruction of justice, assault on a federal officer, and thirteen other counts. That's why they arrested him.
The BLM is a bogus and deceitful organization, much like the rest of today's central socialist government.
Quite possibly. But until they're done away with then the law is the law.
The state should kick them all out and admonish them never to return.
That would be illegal.
The judge is implying, perhaps, that Bundy will dig a hole to China and escape his ranch? Why would the judge care if he's on his own ranch, unless perhaps, the government considers the ranch government property?
There's several legal problems here. First, the judge is clearly prejudicial in his rulings. Attorneys for the defense need to petition for both a change of venue and a new judge. The judge has already made openingly hostile statements towards the defendents in his communications. He's not impartial.
Second, there's an 8th Amendment problem here (maybe 14th amendment too). The government can't use one standard for group of citizens and a different one for others. If you're a conservative and own a gun, throw him in jail until his trial comes up in 4 years. If you're an illegal immigrant, or in a protected progressive class of citizens, you get bail at $100 if you've killed and raped little girls. See the problem? The judge must treat Bundy's accused crime and flight risk just like any other charged citizen, under the Constitution.
"Witnesses have described the level of threatened violence as so intense that something as innocent as the backfire of (a) vehicle, or someone lighting a firecracker, would have set off a firefight".
Were these witnesses also BLM and other government employees with a personal, vested interest in the Bundy's land? Does their testimony conflict with the estimated 300 citizens, plus media who were at the original Bundy ranch stand-off?
The government has won this kind of crap case before. They shoot, arrest, intimidate, confiscate, and to hell with the U.S. Constitution. The only way a "demonstration" such as the Bundy's Wildlife Refuge occupation wins is if they have 10,000 armed "minute men" ready to back them up. The FBI and OSP can shoot an unarmed grandfather (i.e. Lavoy didn't own a 9MM handgun, and left all of his weapons at the Refuge before he left) with impunity on an open road, take kids away from families, and roust protesters using MRAP's if the protesting citizens are alone. After the Fed's kill 500 or a 1000, and lose some of their own, then it's going to be kind of hard for the President and Oregon Governor to cover up the evidence and sweep it under the rug.
That's the dedication it would take to force the Federal Government to comply with the U.S. Constitution, to the basic law of the land. The time is not ripe now, and hopefully, the country can turn back the clock before citizens HAVE to bear arms against their own sworn peace officers. But right now, these protest guys are screwed.
On another note, I wouldn't want to be a BLM employee staying at that Refuge in government housing any time soon. No matter how many security guards are deployed, it only takes one trained, angry man who doesn't give a *** to make that place the most dangerous BLM site in the country. That's my real worry. Once the government runs security operations like outlaws, then citizens will become outlaws, taking the law into their own hands. There are good people in the BLM, FBI, and OSP, and I worry for their safety, as much as I'm concerned for the rights of our citizens.
If the government doesn't start acting honestly,and within the law, then this could get nasty. First off, there needs to be an outside investigation of both the Finicum shooting and conduct of the FBI and OSP throughout the standoff. Maybe deploy organizations with good reputations such a the Texas Rangers and California CHP, led by a special prosecutor with the authority to seat a grand jury and issue subpoenas. Capture and preserve ALL the evidence, depose the officers involved, and get the facts out to the American people quickly.
FReegards.
So, we know your bias. Why don't you educate yourself a bit. It's not as simple as "Bundy is a deadbeat".
Traitors are surrendering US land to Russians, Uranium for speaking fees!
and stopped paying the fees.
******************
Yep Bundy decided back in 1993 he didn’t need to pay the grazing fees for the
federal land he was using for his cattle. He hasn’t paid sence.
Two years later and Mr Bundy has not committed a violent or illegal act yet. The govt overreach and judicial misconduct are what needs to be on trial.
All these things combine and we know that the number of grazing leases and acres grazed has been reduced thru the years, but Congress has a right and duty to do this.
OTOH, there are a lot more recreational sites on the public lands. Lots more coal and natural gas being produced. More Scenic rivers, more endangered species, higher levels of protection to the lands, more wilderness, to name a few.
As for the Hammonds, their issue is/was relatively minor in that it revolved around recreational rights. Grazing lease holders are not granted recreational rights and in the case of the Hammonds, they had no recreation rights on the federal lands adjoining the land they actually owned and the reason they set the fires was to cover up that they had been poaching on these federal lands.
BTW, here is an interesting factoid: In the recent Paul Ryan Budget that Congress passed and Obama signed, Congress extended the Land and Water Conservation Fund for 5 years. It is the money in this fund that the land agencies use when they buy land from a private owner, such as the Hammonds.
You and others may change Federal powers, any or all of them; all that has to be done is amend it. Otherwise, there are real USAians who defend US Constitution against those ignoring it.
My suggestion is you hire a lawyer who specializes in constitutional law and get him to explain it to you.
My suggestion is that USAians return to lawful laws. I have studied law for a long time.
“The BLM is a bogus and deceitful organization, much like the rest of today’s central socialist government.
Quite possibly. But until they’re done away with then the law is the law.
The state should kick them all out and admonish them never to return.
That would be illegal.”
I note the lack of irony in your last point.
***
Let’s see if we got this straight:
Fedzilla has control over postal roads/forts/etc. I read nothing else that gives any ownership/stewardship/right-of-ways/etc. over any other land within a State (we’re not talking Territories here).
Nor does the Constitution grant any authority for the BLM, amongst many other alphabet-agencies.
Yet, somehow ‘that’s the “Law”’, but a State telling the Fed to pound sand, where it has no authority, is ‘illegal’.
And, these guys get locked up for ‘impeding’ said illegal/unconstitutional agents, all while exercising their 2nd A. Rights?
How’s that quote go again, ‘See whom the Law punishes vs. supports...’, or some such.
None was intended.
Fedzilla has control over postal roads/forts/etc. I read nothing else that gives any ownership/stewardship/right-of-ways/etc. over any other land within a State (we’re not talking Territories here).
Article IV, Clause 2: "The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States..." When Oregon was admitted to the Union the Enabling Act specified what public property was being transferred to the state. All other property the state gave up any and all claims to. That remained the property of the U.S. or the property of the Indians living on the reservation.
Nor does the Constitution grant any authority for the BLM, amongst many other alphabet-agencies.
It doesn't give any authority to a U.S. Air Force or a NASA or and FBI either. But the Constitution does give Congress the power to establish by law offices of the Executive and to approve their heads. So that would include the BLM, as well as the FBI and NASA and the Air Force.
Yet, somehow 'that's the "Law"', but a State telling the Fed to pound sand, where it has no authority, is 'illegal'.
Exactly. Except for the part where the state can tell the Federal government where it has no authority. States can't do that.
And, these guys get locked up for 'impeding' said illegal/unconstitutional agents, all while exercising their 2nd A. Rights?
Right again. Except for the part where Bundy & Co. could decide the agents were illegal or unconstitutional. They don't have that power.
How's that quote go again, "See whom the Law punishes vs. supports...', or some such.
Can't help you there. I'm not familiar with any quote like that.
Do you mean the judge, or are you just an employee of the central socialist government?
Oh, no problem.
These are, of course, American traitorous asswipes who are delivering our pitiful nation to the ravenous dogs of death!
We are forced to sit by and watch the extreme degradation of our once proud nation.
Hillary unfurls the flag of the damned surrender monkeys.
Pay your taxes your complicit ignorant serfs!
Enjoy your Armageddon.
Long past time for real Americans to take things into our own hands!
This central socialist government has been invading our lives and our property and our money for too damned long.
This government has become our worst enemy as they favor illegal immigrants and Muslim immigrants over the citizens who have paid for their upkeep and whose forefathers have died for the preservation of this now pitiful nation.
Dump this failed oppressor and opt for a renewal of our nation.
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.