Trump tearing apart national parks

[OnePercenter]

The White House is a national park. Is Trump going to sell that too?

He didn't sell anything. You're confusing him with the Clintons and Obama.

He returned land to Utah that they never owned. That's a sell-off in the worst case.

Oh shut the **** up. What gobbledygook. The feds are still in control, you sad statist fool. It's just not a national monument. It's back in BLM/USFS hands. So don't worry, the feds are still ******* things up.

So Trump didn't do a thing. How are the feds ******* things up?

 

[koshergrl]

Does the State of Utah have finances to support the land in question? The answer is NO.

I don't see how that can reliably be assumed to be true, nor why it is even relevant. This is land which rightfully ought to belong to the state of Utah, or to individual residents of Utah. Does the federal government have the power to seize property, either from states or individuals, on the basis that the owner of that property is alleged not to have the finances to support it? Where is this power enumerated, in the Constitution?

If Utah doesn't have the finances to support all of the land that it rightfully owns, then the correct remedy is for it to sell that land. Let people build houses, and stores, and other facilities; let people live on that land, and work on that land. Let the land be used in the way that maximizes its value to humanity.

There is no good reason,and no legitimate reason, for the federal government to be hoarding for itself, such large amounts of valuable property, and preventing that property from being put to good use; and certainly no excuse for the federal government to not even offer just compensation to those from whom this property was stolen.

Yup.
BTW, most of the lands they have seized have uranium.

And incidentally, ppl, Utah has protected Bear's Ears just fine all these years. There has been more damage done to it since the traitor Obama's seizure of it than there has been in the millennia before.

Which lands have uranium? Please show proof of your claim.

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

 

[koshergrl]

Uranium Mine Seeks to Expand Near Bears Ears | Grand Canyon Trust

 

[koshergrl]

Bears Ears spares uranium, leaving unstudied fossil trove out of monument boundaries – The Denver Post

 

[koshergrl]

The White House is a national park. Is Trump going to sell that too?

He didn't sell anything. You're confusing him with the Clintons and Obama.

He returned land to Utah that they never owned. That's a sell-off in the worst case.

Oh shut the **** up. What gobbledygook. The feds are still in control, you sad statist fool. It's just not a national monument. It's back in BLM/USFS hands. So don't worry, the feds are still ******* things up.

Why would you be against our natural resources a monument?

Because the feds have no authority to seize and lock up land. Period. Not for any purpose except very specific purposes and amounts.

Because when the feds take lands, they make *deals* and then once they have the land, they renege on the deals and throw the people they made the deals with in prison.

They did it to the Indians, and they do it to ranchers and hunters today.

 

[Rustic]

The White House is a national park. Is Trump going to sell that too?

He didn't sell anything. You're confusing him with the Clintons and Obama.

He returned land to Utah that they never owned. That's a sell-off in the worst case.

Oh shut the **** up. What gobbledygook. The feds are still in control, you sad statist fool. It's just not a national monument. It's back in BLM/USFS hands. So don't worry, the feds are still ******* things up.

So Trump didn't do a thing. How are the feds ******* things up?

Breathing

 

[OnePercenter]

Does the State of Utah have finances to support the land in question? The answer is NO.

I don't see how that can reliably be assumed to be true, nor why it is even relevant. This is land which rightfully ought to belong to the state of Utah, or to individual residents of Utah. Does the federal government have the power to seize property, either from states or individuals, on the basis that the owner of that property is alleged not to have the finances to support it? Where is this power enumerated, in the Constitution?

If Utah doesn't have the finances to support all of the land that it rightfully owns, then the correct remedy is for it to sell that land. Let people build houses, and stores, and other facilities; let people live on that land, and work on that land. Let the land be used in the way that maximizes its value to humanity.

There is no good reason,and no legitimate reason, for the federal government to be hoarding for itself, such large amounts of valuable property, and preventing that property from being put to good use; and certainly no excuse for the federal government to not even offer just compensation to those from whom this property was stolen.

Yup.
BTW, most of the lands they have seized have uranium.

And incidentally, ppl, Utah has protected Bear's Ears just fine all these years. There has been more damage done to it since the traitor Obama's seizure of it than there has been in the millennia before.

Which lands have uranium? Please show proof of your claim.

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

FACT CHECK: Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?

 

[koshergrl]

Redoubt News

 

[koshergrl]

Does the State of Utah have finances to support the land in question? The answer is NO.

I don't see how that can reliably be assumed to be true, nor why it is even relevant. This is land which rightfully ought to belong to the state of Utah, or to individual residents of Utah. Does the federal government have the power to seize property, either from states or individuals, on the basis that the owner of that property is alleged not to have the finances to support it? Where is this power enumerated, in the Constitution?

If Utah doesn't have the finances to support all of the land that it rightfully owns, then the correct remedy is for it to sell that land. Let people build houses, and stores, and other facilities; let people live on that land, and work on that land. Let the land be used in the way that maximizes its value to humanity.

There is no good reason,and no legitimate reason, for the federal government to be hoarding for itself, such large amounts of valuable property, and preventing that property from being put to good use; and certainly no excuse for the federal government to not even offer just compensation to those from whom this property was stolen.

Yup.
BTW, most of the lands they have seized have uranium.

And incidentally, ppl, Utah has protected Bear's Ears just fine all these years. There has been more damage done to it since the traitor Obama's seizure of it than there has been in the millennia before.

Which lands have uranium? Please show proof of your claim.

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

FACT CHECK: Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?

Snopes?
Really?

 

[OnePercenter]

Uranium Mine Seeks to Expand Near Bears Ears | Grand Canyon Trust

It appears that the danger outweighs the benefits.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Fake News to anger the population. He paired down National Monuments from the land grab done by The Obama Regime.

Where President Trump pared down the size of two parks largely was the Staircase-Escalante park where President Bill Clinton took 1.89 MILLION ACRES of badlands. It is also the site of our largest deposit, over a TRILLION DOLLARS worth of low sulfur anthracite coal. That was in repayment to the Chinese who Clinton was deeply indebted to for contributions. China controls the other massive deposit of coal which is needed for clean burning ultrasophisticated coal power plants.

Overall, President Obama locked off more land than any other president in history but Escalante is Clinton repaying China.

We have plenty of natural gas. We don't need coal. I suppose they will be allowed to strip mine and destroy the land.

The enviroNazis won't let us build pipelines for the natural gas.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The White House is a national park. Is Trump going to sell that too?

No, it is not.

Try again.

 

[Camp]

The White House is a national park. Is Trump going to sell that too?

No, it is not.

Try again.

Actually, it is.

 

[koshergrl]

And it is one of just a few sites that the feds are authorized to manage.

 

[OnePercenter]

The White House is a national park. Is Trump going to sell that too?

No, it is not.

Try again.

The President of the United States lives in a National Park

President's Park (White House) (U.S. National Park Service)

 

[OnePercenter]

And it is one of just a few sites that the feds are authorized to manage.

The feds are authorized to manage all national parks.

 

[OnePercenter]

The White House is a national park. Is Trump going to sell that too?

No, it is not.

Try again.

Actually, it is.

Ignorance is bliss......

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The White House is a national park. Is Trump going to sell that too?

No, it is not.

Try again.

The President of the United States lives in a National Park

President's Park (White House) (U.S. National Park Service)

Technically correct, but you just cannot walk up and into that park. Look at the mailing address:


1849 C Street NW
Room 1426
Washington, DC 20240

That's not the White House.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The White House is a national park. Is Trump going to sell that too?

No, it is not.

Try again.

Actually, it is.

Ignorance is bliss......

Then you should be extremely happy!

 

[Darkwind]

Does the State of Utah have finances to support the land in question? The answer is NO.

I don't see how that can reliably be assumed to be true, nor why it is even relevant. This is land which rightfully ought to belong to the state of Utah, or to individual residents of Utah. Does the federal government have the power to seize property, either from states or individuals, on the basis that the owner of that property is alleged not to have the finances to support it? Where is this power enumerated, in the Constitution?

If Utah doesn't have the finances to support all of the land that it rightfully owns, then the correct remedy is for it to sell that land. Let people build houses, and stores, and other facilities; let people live on that land, and work on that land. Let the land be used in the way that maximizes its value to humanity.

There is no good reason,and no legitimate reason, for the federal government to be hoarding for itself, such large amounts of valuable property, and preventing that property from being put to good use; and certainly no excuse for the federal government to not even offer just compensation to those from whom this property was stolen.

This should have been the end of the thread. Knowing progressives however.....