Discussion in 'US Constitution' started by Old Rocks, Dec 30, 2015.
What did they violate? Bundy refused to pay what he owed.
And you just made the point very clear. Gov. side argument.
Why has he not been prosecuted for tax evasion?
Much simpler if it were true.
Read post # 4293 I'm not a parrot ya know.
Link us to what you are talking about. They had grazing leases, not grazing rights. That is public land, not ranchers land. And were the government to sell it off as people like you want them to, it would be the big corporations that would buy the land, and then the ranchers would be paying $20 per unit, instead of the present fee that is under $2 per unit. If the corporations would lease the grazing to them at all. More that likely, they would refuse, and buy up the ranchers land a pennies on the dollar after they went broke for lack of grazing land.
Yeah, but he showed them!
You ain't so smart, are you?
Bundy standoff - Wikipedia
998–2012: Legal actions
United States v. Bundy "arose out of Bundy’s unauthorized grazing of his livestock on property owned by the United States and administered by the Department of the Interior through the BLM and the National Park Service." On November 3, 1998, United States District Judge Johnnie B. Rawlinson "permanently enjoined (Bundy) from grazing his livestock within the Bunkerville Allotment ("The Allotment"), and shall remove his livestock from this allotment on or before November 30, 1998... (and) ordered that Plaintiff shall be entitled to trespass damages from Bundy in the amount of $200.00 per day per head for any livestock belonging to Bundy remaining on the Bunkerville Allotment after November 30, 1998." Rawlinson wrote that "[t]he government has shown commendable restraint in allowing this trespass to continue for so long without impounding Bundy’s livestock." This sentence was restated on October 8, 2013, by District Judge Larry R. Hicks. On September 17, 1999, after Bundy failed to comply with the court's earlier order(s), the court issued another order directing Bundy to comply with the 1998 permanent injunction and modifying the trespass damages owed.
2012–15: Legal actions
Bundy's cattle expanded into additional public land over the years. A planned April 2012 roundup of his cattle was called off when Bundy made violent threats against the Bureau of Land Management. The bureau's requests for assistance from the Clark County Sheriff's Department were met by a demand of Sheriff Doug Gillespie that the bureau seek a new warrant because, he said, the original 1998 order had become "stale."
Because of Gillespie's demand, in May 2012 the government filed a second United States v. Bundy case,[a] seeking renewed enforcement authority for the original court orders along with relief for Bundy's trespassing on a new set of additional lands not covered by the original 1998 ruling: "including public lands within the Gold Butte area that are administered by the BLM, and National Park System land within the Overton Arm and Gold Butte areas of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area." On December 21, 2012, the United States moved for summary judgment in this new case, and this motion was granted in an order signed by Senior District Judge Lloyd D. George on July 9, 2013. The ruling permanently enjoined Bundy and his cattle from trespassing on the New Trespass Lands. Another order was issued by Judge Larry R. Hicks on October 8, 2013, which stemmed from the earlier 1998 civil action against Bundy. The order allows the United States to "protect the ... Bunkerville Allotment
The Bundys are criminals. Finicum is a dead criminal. Those who defend the are either wannabee criminals or outright criminals.
Yowel and Bundy both believe becase of this treaty, they have the rights to graze on that 10,000 acres.
It's been a continual charge for all western ranchers of the abuse of the BLM seizure of cattel since the 70's.
Those are the charges.
You have a link that he paid it yet?
Criminals don't pay fines.
Separate names with a comma.