Court opinion exposes BLM’s true intent against Cliven Bundy
For over 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management engaged in a “literal, intentional conspiracy” against Nevada ranchers to force them out of business, according to a federal judge whose court opinion exposes the BLM’s true intent against rancher Cliven Bundy.
In his opinion of United States v. Estate of Hage, U.S. District Court Judge Robert C. Jones reveals that after late Nevada rancher E. Wayne Hage indicated on his 1993 grazing permit renewal that by signing the permit, he was not surrendering his family’s long-standing water and forage rights on the land, the BLM not only rejected the permit but also conspired for decades to both deny his family’s property rights and to destroy their cattle business.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
14 comments:
I've only read a small part of this and need to read it and the many comments in it's entirety, but from what I read an interesting question is raised. Why didn't they file criminal trespass charges against Bundy? They went the civil route no doubt, because the burden of proof is lower. I will take an educated guess, and say it has something to do with the legal owner of these so called public lands. This land was given to the US by Mexico, given by the US to the states and then due to what can be best described as default ended up under the control of the US. Being controlled by and ownership are 2 entirely different concepts.
The government is the new feudal lord, the new robber baron, the _________ fill in the blank with your own.
This is great news for Bundy. There used to be a day when you had to recruit law students who would volunteer their time to dig this stuff up for you.
This is interesting. A permit allows you to do something that would otherwise be illegal. Bundy has no permit (it was revoked in 1994) why hasn't he been charged criminally by the federal government. It's that old "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" thing getting in the way, again.
This will be OK, until it gets to the Illegal "OBAMA girls" on the Supreme Court...
You are correct 2nd Civil War. Didn't make it that far but read on----
*Editor's notes from a Letter to the Editor (9/2012) to the Editor giving background to a letter submitted by Bundy.
"(Last week a story in the Desert Valley Times revealed the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washtington, D.C., in July overturned a lower court judgment in which Sagebrush Rebellion leader Wayne Hage, a Northern Nevada rancher, was awarded millions of dollars in a battle with the federal government over grazing rights among other things. The ruling effectively the Hage family's 30 year legal battle with the feds back at square one. Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy, too, has been in a similar fight with the federal government for decades over similar (but not identical) issues. Here is his take on the whole matter.)"
18,000 ranchers pay their fees with no complaint and you guys want to make a hero of this dead beat. Your against takers or not?
There aren't 18,000 ranchers in the whole US 4:46! Come back when you are better informed!
18,000 is the number of permits issued, 4:46. That's the number that are available. Some go unused, while some ranchers have multiple.
A quick little known fact-the ranchers are taxed on the value of the permits.
446-It's not about paying fees. He didn't apply to renew his permit, in 1993, after realizing the government was really trying to rid the area of grazing. It was then shortly after cancelled and all the other permits (50+) from other ranchers bought back by the county and 'retired.'
Once his permit was cancelled that relieved both parties from their obligation-him to pay and them to let his cattle graze.
This whole issue is based on trespassing not an owed debt.
4:46
With the welfare state in full steam around us, you want to call this man a deadbeat? Ridiculous. Especially with information being uncovered every day showing that he is completely right about the federal government attempting to take the land. On a side note, I saw today that the feds paid a Utah rancher $977,000 for the roundup of Bundy's cattle. We will be living in a third world country sooner than anyone realizes.
7:28-Bundy's figured out they were coming for the cattle when they saw on the fed gov't website-back in Feb from what I can recall,) that a contract (put out to bid) had been awarded to the UT livestock hauling company. The details of the contract were marked confidential. Then of course their antennas went up, and they were on guard to keep an eye out for activity. Sure enough the BLM enters in full force, setting up their "command post" and that's when they put out the call for help.
4:46-Yes, I am against "takers" and in this case it was the federal government who is the taker. And yes there are ranchers who do "pay their fees with no complaint." This isn't that simple.
In the early 1990's the BML drastically cut every rancher's permit in that part of NV because of the tortoise. At least 1 rancher had his permit cut by 90%. It's not hard to figure out that was the end of his livelihood. Bundy realized the BLM was using the fees against the ranchers in other words they were paying the BLM to effectively and systematically put them out of business. So he took a stand, didn't renew his permit, and the BLM cancelled it. Up until then there were more than 50 permits available to use in that area. There aren't any more. What ranchers weren't run out of business by the BLM, had their permits purchased back by the county and the permits were retired.
Maybe we define "hero" different, but to me anyone who stands up to government abuses of any kind is a hero.
People really need to learn the facts instead of spreading or repeating rumors. 18,000 ranchers? lol. geesh
Post a Comment