Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher

[ZUKEYPR]

Lol, yeah we're using our 18 series, delta, and task force 160 for a couple of ranchers. To funny, clearly a conspiracy. Lmao. You do realize that most BLM and NFS LEOs for that matter are prior civ law enforcement and military. I like how the women makes the comment that one vehicle has Oregon plates as if that's a conspiracy as well. Those ranchers are really going to be furious when that UH-60 comes screaming in with a stick of Rangers fast roping in . You're killing me

 

[anderson750]

Lol, yeah we're using our 18 series, delta, and task force 160 for a couple of ranchers. To funny, clearly a conspiracy. Lmao. You do realize that most BLM and NFS LEOs for that matter are prior civ law enforcement and military. I like how the women makes the comment that one vehicle has Oregon plates as if that's a conspiracy as well. Those ranchers are really going to be furious when that UH-60 comes screaming in with a stick of Rangers fast roping in . You're killing me

You can laugh all you want, but there is much more to this story that will surely come out in the future.......meanwhile I will put my tinfoil hat on...

 

[SAMI]

I found this article while searching for something else in relation to the Bundy story... This is interesting, particularly the similar cases sited:

Coming clearly through the throbbing of helicopters and the roar of the SUVS of the feds harassing the Cliven Bundy Ranch, patriots there for Bundy should “tell it to the judge”.



There is mainstream media-suppressed case history in Nevada the feds are desperately trying to keep under wraps.

Chief Judge Robert C. Jones of the Federal District Court of Nevada smacked down high-handed, abusive feds, sending the pretend cowboys riding roughshod over Western ranchers and property owners back to their cobweb-laced offices in 2013.

In spite of their 200 armed snipers with boy toys in tow, those Stetson-wearing feds hunkering down on Cliven Bundy’s Ranch are nothing more than a bunch of cowardly ‘cobweb cowboys’ doing duty for radical environmentalists.

In the upheaval of Bureau of Land Management bureaucrats caving in fear to the radical environmentalists of the day, the Rule of Law still works in court, and everyone of those feds brandishing weapons knows it down at heart.

“The court case, U.S. v. Hage, has been keenly watched by legal analysts and constitutional scholars—but has been completely ignored by the major media.”
(New American, June 3, 2013)



“As we reported last November (”Judge Blasts Federal Conspiracy; Ranch Family Vindicated — Again!”), in June 2012, Judge Jones had issued a scorching preliminary bench ruling that charged federal officials of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) with an ongoing series of illegal actions against Nevada rancher E. Wayne Hage that the judge described as “abhorrent” and a literal, criminal conspiracy.

“Judge Jones said he found that “the government and the agents of the government in that locale, sometime in the ’70s and ’80s, entered into a conspiracy, a literal, intentional conspiracy, to deprive the Hages of not only their permit grazing rights, for whatever reason, but also to deprive them of their vested property rights under the takings clause, and I find that that’s a sufficient basis to hold that there is irreparable harm if I don’t … restrain the government from continuing in that conduct.”

No cowpoke cuss could ever transcend what Judge Jones openly called feds invading ranch land.

“In fact, Judge Jones accused the federal bureaucrats of racketeering under the federal RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Organizations) statute, and accused them as well of extortion, mail fraud, and fraud, in an effort “to kill the business of Mr. Hage.”

Judge Jones bottom-lined what the government is doing to ranchers and property owners—end of chapter!

He, and likely other federal court black robes, know that the mainstream media goes into overdrive in trying to keep the truth from the masses.

Tragically, Fed-harassed rancher Wayne Hage was vindicated three years after he died. (Capital Press, Dec. 8, 2009).

While no one (mercifully) has died on the Bundy ranch—yet—the stories of Bundy,—-Hage, Wally Klump and others are a disturbing match.

“In a previous court decision, Senior Judge Loren Smith referred to the well-publicized Hage lawsuit as “a drama worthy of a tragic opera with heroic characters.”

“A federal judge has added $150,000 to the original $4.22 million judgment won by the estate of rancher Wayne Hage in a years-long battle over property rights.

“The federal government had asked Senior Judge Loren Smith to throw out the judgment. Instead, he increased it.

“Hage, a leader of the “Sagebrush Rebellion” against federal control of land, was the husband of former Rep. Helen Chenoweth-Hage, R-Idaho. They both died in 2006.

“The order is the most recent victory in a legal dispute that stretches back to 1991, when Hage filed suit against the government for taking his private property without just compensation.

“Hage’s 7,000-acre ranch in Nye County, Nev., bordered several allotments in the Toiyabe National Forest on which he built fences, corrals, water facilities and other rangeland improvements for cattle grazing.

“Tensions began to mount between the rancher and the U.S. Forest Service in the late 1970s, when the agency permitted the introduction of elk to the national forest, resulting in damaged fences and scattered cattle, according to court records.

“Over the next decade, other incidents aggravated the strain and eventually led to the lawsuit.

“According to court documents, the Forest Service excluded Hage’s cattle from forage and water in certain allotments, impounded animals that entered those allotments and prevented him from maintaining ditches needed to exercise his water rights.

“In his legal complaint, Hage claimed the agency had breached its contractual obligations and violated his constitutional rights.

“During the course of litigation, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims decided the Forest Service could legally prohibit grazing on the allotments without compensating Hage, since grazing permits are licenses and not contracts.

“As such, the impoundment of cattle was not an unconstitutional taking because the cattle had trespassed on government land, the court said.

“However, the court ruled that the agency had taken Hage’s water rights, ditch rights-of-way, roads, water facilities and other structures without just compensation and in 2008 ordered the government to pay him $4.22 million.

“The federal government asked the court to change or set aside the financial compensation, alleging there’s no evidence Hage actually built hundreds of miles of fences, trails, ditches and pipelines on the allotments.

“Under the law, Hage would qualify for compensation only if he had built the structures, the government said.

“Because his grazing permits only authorized Hage to maintain the structures, he was not entitled to their full value, the government said.

“The judge disagreed.

“In the context of the grazing permits, “maintenance” included placing or construction, he said in the most recent ruling.

“The government’s argument “cannot be squared with the language of the statute and the reality of range work and construction,” Smith said.

“In adding more than $150,000 to the award, the judge ruled that his previous decision had mistakenly omitted the value of ditches and pipelines taken by the government.”

Yesterday, there were reports of confrontations “teetering on violence” at the Bundy Ranch, where family members and supporters angrily confronted rangers holding tasers and barking dogs.

The sounds of the Sagebrush Revolution are getting louder with a warning to high-handed feds frightened into doing the work of radical environmentalists against ranchers. The warning coming through loudly and clearly is telling the cobweb cowboys of the government: “Back off!”

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/62362

 

[JL Rockies]

BLM... lolz.

 

[JL Rockies]

Jesus changed the world with only 12 apostles, and even one of them turned out to be from the Fed.


BLM... lolz.

 

[ozzy702]

[video=youtube;tAwALTdrMZ8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tAwALTdrMZ8[/video]

 

[Houndoc]

Glad it is getting resolved without violence. Feared that would not happen. Obama is smarter than Clinton I guess.

However, underlying issues still unresolved.

While I fully recognize the need to rein in federal power and abuse of power, those of us who appreciate our public lands/wilderness need also to be concerned about those who claim 100 years of family history as the right to do whatever the heck they wish to with the land. We could all lose a lot in that battle as well.

 

[cruiseroutfit]

Best way to lose a battle, claim victory against the wrong opponent

Again, the BLM was sued and court-ordered into removing the trespass cattle, there is a good chance half or more of their boots on the ground didn't want to want to be there either. Groups like the CBD, Suwa, Sierra Club, GOBW, etc are sitting back laughing at how much confusion they can inspire while pressing forward to get the Sage Grouse listed, Wilderness accepted and ultimately motorized routes closed via Congressional acts i.e. NEPA and FPLMA. We are not even on the same playing field as they are on. Like cheering for the SL Bees to win the World Series

 

[cruiseroutfit]

[video=youtube;tAwALTdrMZ8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tAwALTdrMZ8[/video]

Sorry, blanket statements like that are not the case. In the case of the Desert Tortoise, the BLM is beholden to the listing by the US Fish & Wildlife services and management according to the Congress act. While they obviously have much latitude in how they execute those laws (and Act of Congress is a law) and thus making their own internal regulations, they are beholden to the Act. Spend some time reading FLPMA, it ties many hands including the motorized community. The laws of the 70's including the repeal of RS2477 (part of FLPMA) were not kind to the motorized community and public land users we are associated with. Want to fix that? Get FLPMA repealed or amended to protect public land users. Until then, WAG's and anti-motorized/industry groups will continue to use FLPMA (including WSA's) to their advantage such as they have all over Utah. This second the BLM is being sued in a handful of cases by SUWA persuant to FLPMA and by the CBD to protect the Sage Grouse in the western states. If that happens and the BLM loses in court such as they did with the Tortoise and Nevada... it's going to be a game changer for Utah's west desert public lands.

 

[ozzy702]

Sorry, blanket statements like that are not the case. In the case of the Desert Tortoise, the BLM is beholden to the listing by the US Fish & Wildlife services and management according to the Congress act. While they obviously have much latitude in how they execute those laws (and Act of Congress is a law) and thus making their own internal regulations, they are beholden to the Act. Spend some time reading FLPMA, it ties many hands including the motorized community. The laws of the 70's including the repeal of RS2477 (part of FLPMA) were not kind to the motorized community and public land users we are associated with. Want to fix that? Get FLPMA repealed or amended to protect public land users. Until then, WAG's and anti-motorized/industry groups will continue to use FLPMA (including WSA's) to their advantage such as they have all over Utah. This second the BLM is being sued in a handful of cases by SUWA persuant to FLPMA and by the CBD to protect the Sage Grouse in the western states. If that happens and the BLM loses in court such as they did with the Tortoise and Nevada... it's going to be a game changer for Utah's west desert public lands.

What can we do to help push back FLPMA?

 

[cruiseroutfit]

What can we do to help push back FLPMA?

A literal act of Congress. FLPMA dictates Wilderness, Wilderness Study Areas, how lands are managed for grazing (along with the Taylor Grazing Act), grazing fees, right-of-ways etc. Basically this document (along with NEPA) has more pertinence to OHV use on public lands than any other I can think of. If we could get the support to make amendments to FLPMA we could realize some major change in how this entire situation is going down. I'm talking change, not parades...

 

[jackjoh]

Something I do not understand. We know what needs to be done and our politicians know what needs to be done but nothing is done. I and other members of U4 have been in meetings with Hatch, Lee, Bishop and Chaffetz to no avail. The latest proposal from Bishop seems to be a start but I personally am not sure and it is not enough. What is it that is keeping politicians from helping us?

 

[DAA]

The Golden Rule.

He who has the gold, makes the rules.

If we had enough money and were willing to spend it, there is no limit to what change could be accomplished.

I know that sounds awfully cynical. But, that sentence above - I believe that it's the literal truth. Believe it with all my heart. You "contribute" enough money to enough politicians and there is NOTHING they won't do to keep that money coming.

As it stands now, there are too many people who sincerely believe we're wrong. They vote too. Though not as important or as powerful as money, these people on the other side of the issue are what's known in political jargon as "a constituency". A constituency is almost as important as money in winning local elections. In the absence of lots of money to make up for it, politicians who pander and tell lies designed to appeal to the other side will act conspicuously in ways that are designed to appeal to their constituents. Enough money would get them acting for us.

Our side plays exactly the same game. The ones on our side just pander and tell lies and act conspicuously in ways designed to appeal to us. Enough money would get them acting against us.

- DAA

 

[cruiseroutfit]

The Golden Rule.

He who has the gold, makes the rules.

If we had enough money and were willing to spend it, there is no limit to what change could be accomplished.

I know that sounds awfully cynical. But, that sentence above - I believe that it's the literal truth. Believe it with all my heart. You "contribute" enough money to enough politicians and there is NOTHING they won't do to keep that money coming.

As it stands now, there are too many people who sincerely believe we're wrong. They vote too. Though not as important or as powerful as money, these people on the other side of the issue are what's known in political jargon as "a constituency". A constituency is almost as important as money in winning local elections. In the absence of lots of money to make up for it, politicians who pander and tell lies designed to appeal to the other side will act conspicuously in ways that are designed to appeal to their constituents. Enough money would get them acting for us.

Our side plays exactly the same game. The ones on our side just pander and tell lies and act conspicuously in ways designed to appeal to us. Enough money would get them acting against us.

- DAA

100% agree. I don't know if it is is a socioeconomic reasoning or just apathy on our side but enviro groups have no problem attracting big dollars which is easy to turn into big action, the proof is in the results i.e. the things CBD and Sierra Club accomplish with their money. Hell the federal government had to pay back ~$1 mil to the Sierra Club as they are entitled to recoup some portion of the legal fees on cases they win... so not only do they have the money to push a case into court, they get some of that money back out of the American taxpayers pocket.

 

[ZUKEYPR]

Like cheering for the SL Bees to win the World Series

What! The Bees aren't a contender?

 

[SAMI]

[video=youtube;HFiosLqjoQQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFiosLqjoQQ[/video]

 

[flexyfool]

100% agree. I don't know if it is is a socioeconomic reasoning or just apathy on our side but enviro groups have no problem attracting big dollars which is easy to turn into big action, the proof is in the results i.e. the things CBD and Sierra Club accomplish with their money. Hell the federal government had to pay back ~$1 mil to the Sierra Club as they are entitled to recoup some portion of the legal fees on cases they win... so not only do they have the money to push a case into court, they get some of that money back out of the American taxpayers pocket.

They also collude with the government agencies to bring lawsuits that both know will effectively "force" the agencies to do what they both want.

 

[jackjoh]

It looks like the bottom line is that we need money/lawyers and start being pro active.

 

[JL Rockies]

Best explanation to why you're possibly on the wrong side and the folly of negotiating with the people who cause all the problems in the first place. Personal friend and founder of the Landmark Legal Foundation. He was responsible for getting Clinton charged with contempt and disbarred among other great works.

http://therightscoop.com/in-depth-m...ween-cliven-bundy-and-the-federal-government/


BLM... lolz.

 

[Stephen]

[video=youtube;tAwALTdrMZ8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tAwALTdrMZ8[/video]

Watched first 30 seconds of this and had to stop. Pretty much everything that he said was wrong up to that point, which doesn't give me hope for the rest of his argument. I hate it when people try to dilute the situation so much just for the sake of stirring the pot. It is far, FAR more complicated that this guy is trying to make it out to sound.