UPDATED Breaking: Deal Reached Between BLM and Clive Bundy?

By: Ben Swann
181

UPDATE:
THE Bureau of Land Management is backing away from the Bundy Ranch citing “safety issues” here is the statement released Saturday morning:

“As we have said from the beginning of the gather to remove illegal cattle from federal land consistent with court orders, a safe and peaceful operation is our number one priority. After one week, we have made progress in enforcing two recent court orders to remove the trespass cattle from public lands that belong to all Americans.

Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public.

We ask that all parties in the area remain peaceful and law-abiding as the Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service work to end the operation in an orderly manner.”

ORIGINAL STORY: A local news station in Las Vegas is reporting that a deal may be in the works to end the round up of Clive Bundy’s cattle in Nevada.

According to 8 News Now in Las Vegas, Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie has brokered a tentative deal between the Bureau of Land Management and Bundy. Under the reported agreement, the BLM would “halt its roundup of Bundy’s cattle and withdraw its employees from the Gold Butte area.”

As for the cattle that have already been rounded up, the BLM would move forward with the sale of those cattle but would reportedly share the revenue with Bundy. That part of the agreement seems very strange considering that Bundy contends that the BLM is stealing his cattle. Why would he allow his “stolen” cattle to be sold and then accept a share of the proceeds?

News 8 Now also reports that the tentative agreement was reached Friday night after Sheriff Gillespie went to the ranch to finalize the arrangement.

As we have been telling you, the situation in Nevada is increasingly tense as hundreds of supporters are pouring in to Clark County to support the Bundys. If there is a deal being reached, it is likely because the BLM recognizes that they have already lost this fight in the court of public opinion and are searching for an exit strategy.

Support the Truth In Media Project


"Like" Ben Swann on Facebook
  • bkeyser

    That part of the agreement seems very strange considering that Bundy contends that the BLM is stealing his cattle. Why would he allow his “stolen” cattle to be sold and then accept a share of the proceeds?

    Because they’re dead?

    • Conservatism is a Mental Illne

      They are just saying it’s an agreement. They will storm in during the night and arrest him, like they should have done in the first place. Welfare rancher refuses to pay taxes, threatens peace officers with firearms, gets locked up.

      It’s a great story. With a very happy ending just around the corner.

  • CaptainUSA

    Not only have they Lost this. But I will not ever spend any money in Nevada unless it is on some Bundy Steaks. Done with all the Casino’s that have Vegas as a Corporat headquarters. Now when will CONgress arrest Harry Reid for using brute force to help his deal with the Communist Chinese against a US citizen?

    • Irish715

      It isn’t Las Vegas that has anything to do with this situation!! This is all about the BLM vs. Bundy. The state of Nevada and Clark County have no jurisdiction over Federal land within Clark County boundaries. Harry Reid is a different subject, however. He’s a sleaze ball who shouldn’t ever be elected to the Senate again!

      • Heff1583

        Don’t you mean public land

        • Irish715

          What ever label you want to put on it doesn’t change the fact that Clark County has no enforcement or legal jurisdiction over Federal land.

          • CaptainUSA

            You just don’t know YOUR rights. Wanna learn check out the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. The Sheriff is the only enforcement officer named in the Constitution. He has more Power than the President in his county.

          • Irish715

            Your tinfoil hat is too tight…

          • Conservatism is a Mental Illne

            One thing i’ve never figured out, If the government has been able to read our minds for so many years, why do they still need wire taps and e-mail interceptions?

          • CaptainUSA
          • Heff1583

            go to ireland..this is our country, our land

      • CaptainUSA

        Your right the People there did not do much for a fellow citizen and just so you know Clark County Sheriff has FULL jurisdiction in his County and it is the same County right. So maybe after you get more Loyal Politicians or you can get the Sleaze ball recalled or Arrested people will not look down on your corruption.

        • Irish715

          Yeah, he has FULL jurisdiction in his county…over land that is not owned by the Federal goverment in some way, shape, or form. Arguing over the words “public” or “owned” doesn’t change the law.

  • Ward Damon Hubbard

    ANY deal, that does not include steps necessary to make the changes needed for all of us, is simply sell out and “Business As Usual”

    • keithsmustache

      It’s not a sell out. He can go on with his cattle grazing and live their lives. He won the battle for freedom today.

      • Brendon

        He won the battle in a few ways. One, it showed the federal government how fast a militia could mobilize. Two. No bloodshed.

        • Conservatism is a Mental Illne

          You need to seriously educate yourself on what a militia is. A bunch of rednecks with guns who rally around a man who continues to break the law, is not a militia. It’s a criminal organization.

          He buys guns with welfare money that taxpayers contributed to, so he can protect his right to break the law, and not contribute to society?

          Scumbag on all accounts. He’ll be in jail soon. As he should be.

      • linda hanna

        Yep, he can go on cheating American taxpayer by not paying appropriate fees for grazing on public lands.

  • keithsmustache

    Why? To avoid escalation and his family from being killed. He won. 1/2 the proceeds are a small sum for winning this battle for liberty.

    • linda hanna

      Since when does liberty include stealing (non payment of use fees). Suppose we all storm our national parks and refuse to pay the entrance. Ever tried not paying a parking ticket? We are a country of law abiding citizens who expect law enforcement to protect our rights against those who wish to ignore the law.

      • keithsmustache

        You are very uninformed. He owns preemptive rights to graze on public lands in Nevada. The federal government is intruding and confiscating land from productive ranchers. He was the only one to hold out and confront them. He is a hero. You are the problem why we are here today. I suggest you look into the matter further.

      • Conservatism is a Mental Illne

        Now they’re using their 2nd Amendment “right” to defend their “right” not to pay the taxes? … What happens when you don’t pay your mortgage? … Your house gets foreclosed and you lose it. Why should it be any different for Bundy? He receives welfare, but wont pay the tax? Interesting how he has no problem accepting taxpayers money each month, but he doesn’t feel like HE should have to pay?

        What makes this man above the law?

  • http://www.thecontract.us scotthudson

    Everyone should check out the book, The Contract On The Government. It is the book the feds DO NOT want you reading! Find it here: http://www.thecontract.us/

  • Vance

    This is a loss of freedom property and sets a presadent of usurping goverment. Traitors Liers and thieves are winning! Selling the future of the world not just America.

  • Rick20033

    I’d say Bundy is allowing the government to share the proceeds of the cattle sale in order to defuse the situation and to return things to the way they have always been. This is an embarrassing defeat for the federal government and a good sign that things may finally be turning our way. That, or else the government will have a much better plan in place the next time they try this. Intimidation clearly isn’t going to work. You can see why they are so desperate to take our guns, though.

  • Lucky Leisuresuit Larry

    “We ask that all parties in the area remain peaceful and law-abiding as the Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service work to end the operation in an orderly manner.”

    Except in first amendment free zones, of course.

    • LibertyORdeath

      Hey Larry are you lucky because you took over ownership of the WTC months before 9/11 and won a multimillion dollar insurance settlement that covered both WTC towers from terrorist attacks, or is it because the “terrorists” flew planes into those towers bringing them down and saving you BILLIONS in asbestos removal???

      • Lucky Leisuresuit Larry

        Pull it…they know!

  • Anonymous

    If the BLM tries to take the Cattle the People need to shoot the tires out and save the cattle. Hanging people for stealing cattle is still the law in Nevada and need to round up those who try and take the cattle. Death to BLM!!!!

    • LibertarianUSA42

      spoken like a patriot!

      • Conservatism is a Mental Illne

        Spoken like an ignorant red neck!

    • Guest

      dEATH to welfare deadbeat rural parasite ranchers

      • keithsmustache

        Welfare deadbeat? You wouldn’t last one day on the ranch. Hardest working people in the country to provide food for ingrates like you. Get lost.

      • Saw The Light

        the parasites are supporters of the Dear Leader.

  • Ogie Ogilthorpe

    Lets get it on Obama!!!

  • Brian Morton

    “After one week, we have made progress in enforcing two recent court
    orders to remove the trespass cattle from public lands that belong to
    all Americans.”

    Quite the assumption. The only reason a claim of these lands belong to all Americans is through the uneducated assertion that it is so. The unrealized matter at hand is that this assertion is believed to be, is that ownership of these public lands are retained by the Federal government is only done by the usurpation of the Constitution of these United States. These lands, according to the confines of the Constitution, belong to the state of Nevada. Therego, claims of Federal ownership and jurisdiction of the BLM are null and void. The actions of the BLM and Federal courts were and are illegal. That’s what you need to know.

    • Its about time

      The land was taken away for turtles that were relocated and now they have to many and are Being euthenized. ..Harry Reid was behind this land grab..the cattle actually helped fertilize thus land. So this was just a government game.

  • Reality Check

    “[Reid] and his oldest son, Rory, are both involved in an effort by a Chinese energy giant, ENN Energy Group, to build a $5 billion solar farm and panel manufacturing plant in the southern Nevada desert,” he wrote. “Reid has been one of the project’s most prominent advocates, helping recruit the company during a 2011 trip to China and applying his political muscle on behalf of the project in Nevada.”

    http://www.infowars.com/breaking-sen-harry-reid-behind-blm-land-grab-of-bundy-ranch/

    This is what it’s all about, Ben. Why you don’t want to report the facts is beyond any lawful person. The Chinese are buying up everything they can in America. All of the closed up manufacturing facilities are being bought by the Chinese as the treasonous rats on Capital Hill continue to sell what’s left of America to the Chinese government.

    The treasonous rats on the hill call this legal because they say we elected them to office. We may have elected some of these criminals to office, but that does not give them the right to trash the country and the Constitution, which they took an oath to protect and defend.

    Every-single- one of these treasonous rats needs to be rounded up and put in prison for selling us out to the highest bidder and Ben Swann needs to be pointing that out to people.

    • Its about time

      Not one outlet reported the truth. Not one did the research on Harry Reid. It was not the Feds. jurisdiction. The Bundys in their interview stated they would pay cattle fees to the Sovereign state of Nevada. ..does anyone Know what Sovereign even means. Why does the media nit report the truth…The Truth In Media is not even here.

      • CornellUG1993

        Well, it’s probably an issue that the solar project was canceled nearly a year ago, that might be why nobody else reports on it.

  • Patrick Henry

    If it is PUBLIC LAND that the Bundys have been on since the 1870′s, whyu cant they still use it??

    • Its about time

      They took land away from the Indians. I guess now we are the targets. History repeating itself.

    • Truth

      Public doesn’t mean anyone can do whatever they please. It’s owned by ALL of us, and has rules about it’s usage.

      • DrunkenGodMode .

        To be far to Bundy that land was delegated by the federal government as a grazing area.

        • Conservatism is a Mental Illne

          Yes, and there is a tax to use said land. He hasn’t paid it. What happens when you don’t pay taxes? Repo man comes and takes your shit. Why is it any different in this case?

          • keithsmustache

            He did pay taxes to Nevada. He refused to pay the Federal gov’t. They don’t belong there. It’s Nevada’s land.

          • bob dole

            Doesn’t sound like public land to me. Bundy has paid as much if not more taxes as anyone else. There is a fee he hasn’t paid if that’s what you are referring to? Its not even put through by congress just an arbitrary cost by BLM, which sole purpose is to keep ranchers from grazing land that was dedicated for grazing. He’s kept up with permits required to graze but you think its OK for BLM to revoke that without changing law?

    • linda hanna

      They can but they haven’t been paying the associated fees. It is owned by US all but it is managed for us by BLM and there are use fees that are 20 years in arrears in Mr. Bundy’s case. That’s cheating taxpayers.

    • Buford Longshanks

      How many Native Americans did the Bundy’s kill and run off the land?

  • Its about time
  • Omaha Guy

    I searched and I cannot find where benswann.com was upset at all about the Texas property owners whose land was seized by the oil companies. They lied about how it was a common carrier (which in reality is a private carrier) and simply seized private property. Benswann.com must not consider that so important.

    If the federal government wants to back down it shows they are more responsive to property rights than the state of Texas is, even though it is public land already anyway.

  • linda hanna

    Clive Bundy is a thief. He is stealing from the American people. No matter where we stand on other issues, public lands belong to US and is administered and maintained by the BLM on our behalf. When a man decides not to pay the appropriate and reasonable fees for land use he is cheating the public. I expect MY govt to act on MY behalf to resolve the issue. Granted the show of force in Nev may be overkill, but it is Mr. Bundy who escalated the events and stands in contempt of the law, both Federal and State law, and in defiance of court orders. Hopefully his sorry butt will end up in jail so he can cool off and decide how to pay the money he owes US. The right wing media is fanning the fires unnecessarily. Must not be much else going on.

    • Buford Longshanks

      How many Native Americans did the Bundy’s kill and run off the land??

      • keithsmustache

        Moron.

    • guest9333

      He is a thief and it doesn’t surprise me that lunatics on the right support this vile worthless welfare ranching parasite Clive Bundy Bundy is a CRIMINAL

    • Lion Hawk

      Well your precious government representatives have sold our public land to the Chinese. Who is stealing from who and who is the real thief here? Who is paying Bundy for the good work he has done to that public land? Better work than the BLM has ever done mind you. Your government has basically taken all of our rights away and you sit there and act as the government is your hero. How would you feel if the feds showed up in your yard with cross hairs targeting your chest? Which would include your family and friends, with military weapons, Attacking and provoking because of a government power grab says it has that right to do so and you have no rights to defend yourself, friends, or family. Just sit there, bend over when you are told to and take it when they want to give it to you. You clearly haven’t done the research on this subject and the parties involved. The fact is that our tax dollars are being used against us. Hope you find happiness in that.

    • petertrast

      The feds cannot legally “own land”. They have defiled the laws almost since the day this country existed.

    • http://FreedomOutpost.com/ Tim Brown

      No he is not. Try reading the real issue here in the statement of Bundy’s daughter. The land has been worked by him and his family for three generations and the BLM quit doing their job for the fees they were imposing years ago….but they still want the money. http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/breaking-blm-cease-bundy-ranch-operation/

  • Buford Longshanks

    I AM A BLACK BLM EMPLOYEE AND A STAUNCH OBAMA SUPPORTER.

    FUKC YOU PEOPLE. Soldiers invade and occupy Iraq and Afghanistan for
    OVER A DECADE……you BRUTALIZED AND KILLED CIVILIANS, now those same
    KILLERS are back in your SHIT COUNTRY getting ready to do the same thing
    to you.

    FARRAKHAN WAS RIGHT……”THE SAME WAR AND DEATH YOU BROUGH TO THE CITIZENS OF IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN WILL BE AT YOUR DOOR SOON!”

    ALLAH AKBAR

    • MattC

      Dumb ass

      • Buford Longshanks

        COWARD. We will get your guns…

        • petertrast

          Yes you will. Bullets first.

        • ray

          you are so funny Buford the only guns you will get from us is the ones libtards can find that means about 100 million other guns will be pointed at your black ass because you will be running like your muslim brothers

    • Jake

      Islam is a religion of ‘peace’ and if you don’t believe it, they will burn your house, cut your eyes out, rape your women, kill your parents, stab your friends, blow up your buildings, torture your children and behead everyone in their psychotic path. Thank you Jesus, for, unlike Islam, offering kindness, love, mercy and salvation.

      • Buford Longshanks

        America has had troops in Muslim lands for over 10 years. Get a clue.

        • Heff1583

          do yourself a favor strap up and blow yourself

    • Lion Hawk

      Once upon a time, one of my Shoshoni brothers was killed and then put up on a spit and cook and then eaten by the US Government soldiers. The reason was that the tribe didn’t want to sign a treaty offered by the US Government. They reluctantly signed. Many of us here in America didn’t support the wars you mentioned, so you think we should pay for those lives with the same kind of treatment? If America loses it’s rights, the rest of the world will be worse off. Remember terds flow downhill. I also thank Obama for selling our country out. Didn’t he receive a Nobel Peace Prize for killing folks in these countries you speak of? If you want to blame someone then blame the source. Not the innocent folks who don’t support the abuse of power demonstrated by any government administration. And please don’t place any cross hairs on me if you are told to do so. I will defend myself.

      • Buford Longshanks

        Americans are not innocent, they will get what they deserve. You are not a Shoshoni. You’re a EURO-TRASH INVADER who’s ancestor probably raped a teenage native girl.

        • Lion Hawk

          Sounding like AL Sharpton, using his baiting techniques doesn’t do you justice. Being 25% Native American living in Cherokee and Catawaba land puts me far away from what is on the other side of the great blue pond. I use to support Obama but have changed my stance since he speaks with a fork tongue like all the rest of them. That is where the race card doesn’t work. So if your stance is to speak with a forked tongue, continue on. I am a Blackfoot and you seem to be the control freak who is lost between all of the lies you speak of. I am really tired of dealing with the disconnect being displayed everywhere you look on top of the issues that threaten our liberties and free agency. Be it whatever. Even the BLM who said their oath with a fork tongue. If that includes you then so be it.

    • Dr. Common Sense

      Hi, I’m a white guy. Now that I mentioned my race first can we continue a discussion about the issue at hand that had no reason for the mention of race.

    • Saw The Light

      get a real job!

  • Brett Greshko

    The Gov’t set up a First Amendment Zone for free speech, so We The People set up a Second Amendment Zone filled with militia. Now they want to talk it out.

    • Mario Hernandez

      No, you are not “we the people.” The majority of people think these people are idiots.

      If you want to talk about the Constitution, here:

      “Federal land ownership began when the original 13 states ceded their “western” lands (between the Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi River) to the central government between 1781 and 1802. Substantial land acquisition in North America via treaties and purchases began with the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and culminated with the purchase of Alaska in 1867. In total, the federal government acquired 1.8 billion acres in North America.

      The U.S. Constitution addresses the relationship of the federal government to
      lands. Article IV, § 3, Clause 2 — the Property Clause — gives Congress authority over federal property generally, and the Supreme Court has described Congress’s power to legislate under this Clause as “without limitation.” The equal footing doctrine (based on language within Article IV, § 3, Clause 1), and found in state enabling acts, provides new states with equality to the original states in terms of constitutional rights, but has not been used successfully to force the divestment of federal lands. The policy question of whether to acquire more, or to dispose of any or all, federal lands is left to Congress to decide.”

      http://www.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/crsreports/crsdocuments/RL34267_12032007.pdf

      • Brett Greshko

        That’s OK, a majority of people thought General Washington and his troops were idiots and troublemakers as well, or at least refused to take a side. Today, those people are considered traitors and cowards. Which are you?

        Originally, federal control was limited to a 50 square mile area called District of Columbia and military bases only. Article 4, Section 3 deals specifically with TERRITORIES of the US, not States. States have control over their land, or at least should and did, until SCOTUS started giving power over state lands to the federal government. But just because “control” is stretched and manipulated “legally” doesn’t make it right, or consistent with the intent of the Constitution. No where in Congress’ list of enumerated powers does the Constitution grant these powers to the Fed Gov’t. The people of this country should have stronger property rights than the federal government if we are truly to be considered free.

  • Guest

    I hope the BLM takes the rest of this welfare rancher’s cattle. This welfare rancher is a criminal and a deadbeat. Put this rancher in prison where he belongs I wish the feds would have shot those worthless right wing militia wackos tio death

    • hyraxx

      Thanks for the lols.

    • petertrast

      Way to be anonymous, coward. Come to Nevada and do it yourself, you spineless gubmint boot licking sheep. Maybe learn the law and history of the situation before opening your ignorant, tyranny loving mouth.

      • Mario Hernandez

        The law is quite clear on this issue, Peter. Maybe you should learn it? Here, I will help.

        “Federal land ownership began when the original 13 states ceded their “western” lands (between the Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi River) to the central government between 1781 and 1802. Substantial land acquisition in North America via treaties and purchases began with the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and culminated with the purchase of Alaska in 1867. In total, the federal government acquired 1.8 billion acres in North America.

        The U.S. Constitution addresses the relationship of the federal government to
        lands. Article IV, § 3, Clause 2 — the Property Clause — gives Congress authority over federal property generally, and the Supreme Court has described Congress’s power to legislate under this Clause as “without limitation.” The equal footing doctrine (based on language within Article IV, § 3, Clause 1), and found in state enabling acts, provides new states with equality to the original states in terms of constitutional rights, but has not been used successfully to force the divestment of federal lands. The policy question of whether to acquire more, or to dispose of any or all, federal lands is left to Congress to decide.”

        http://www.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/crsreports/crsdocuments/RL34267_12032007.pdf

    • Saw The Light

      Eric Holder is that you?

  • hyraxx

    How does he still owe the same amount after those thugs repo’d his cattle? Remind me of mafia tactics

  • trentthecaptain

    Don’t negotiate with terrorists.

  • High Plains Drifter

    “I was just told by commissioner Collins of Clark County NV that all of us folks from Utah are a bunch of “inbred bastards” and if we are coming to Clark County NV to support Clive Bundy we all “better have funeral plans”. We should “turn our asses around on mind our own f-ing business”. Now there’s some classy leadership for you,” wrote Bushman on his official Facebook page.”

    http://www.infowars.com/county-commissioner-says-bundy-supporters-better-have-funeral-plans/

    Why isn’t this f–king scumbag in jail for saying this? If you or I said it, we would be in jail immediately.

    Better yet, why isn’t “Truth in Media” reporting the ugly facts of what’s going on here?

    Ben, did they offer you a deal?

    Tell the truth, Ben, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, the good, the bad and the ugly.

    • Mario Hernandez

      Ummm…because you can’t be arrested and thrown in jail for saying something?

      That pesky Constitution thing, huh?

      SMDH.

  • Mary Balderson

    I bet the same people who praise this scumbag are also the ones who bitch about corporate tax cuts…..bunch of hypocrites.

  • Kathy Fulkerson

    They are just trying to save face . If they give him his cattle back, It is an admission of guilt and they fear being sued.. I would say NO. The cattle belong to Bundy, They should not benefit from another man’s property. If Bundy allows them to profit, Then he puts himself in a position of acknowledging he owes them something. Just my thoughts.

  • Heather

    I’d love to know why anyone supports him. Why should he get to skip out on taxes and fees when the 1000s of law abiding ranchers don’t? What makes him so special? He’s not. I’m with the BLM – enforce the law equally to ALL. 20 years is too long to get away scott free.

    • SebGary

      Heather:
      From my understanding, Cliven Bundy has a treaty with the US that his cattle may graze on said land/property. Now comes the US with, we won’t obey the treaty and do as we please.

      • gizmo

        You must be listening to Faux news

      • Draken

        Mr. Bundy is not a nation thus he can not have a treaty. He can argue a breech of contract all he wants, the courts have already decided that issue, and they said the cattle had to get off of federal lands…

        • SebGary

          In the 1800′s it wasn’t called a contract. it was called a treaty. You didn’t have to be a Nation or a Country to receive one.

          • Kriegar

            Unless…

        • SebGary

          CHAPTER 568 – GRAZING AND RANGING
          https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-568.html

    • Douglas

      If you have to ask, you will never understand. Some people just don’t like extortion …..

    • Kriegar

      There is an entire other side to the argument, as there is with any argument. You need to google it just a wee bit.

  • Wyatt James Paxton

    Several things to tink as a rancher, the cttle have been stressed, placed where god only knows where and mostly injuired. Secd thre were eenses in the oundp& trasport which Bndywould doanyways to sell soe of these cattle. BUT BLM has over teppe overcharged in many cass without doing anything fo th fees. I have een ths directly for years. They review ever development on a prce wi a creek, do little to no review for $2600! This is legal robbery.

    • Dr. Common Sense

      I concur, I’m from Northern Nevada and the BLM has screwed a lot of ranchers using bullshit over reaching regulations and bully tactics.

    • Kriegar

      And then they want to “share” the revenue from the cattle with this guy. It makes me CHOKE. Thieving s.o.b.’s

  • Nohea

    If these Law Enforcement Officers would ever need your help, don’t help them. They would have killed you with no regrets. Did they know the truth about Harry Reid and the Chinese? Did they even care? .I mean come on now, these officers are college grads, yet they behave like ghetto rats. Fire all of them. They have to be held accountable for their actions. They work for us not for Mr Reid and the Chinese government. See their photo’s above. Good for you Mr Bundy for not caving in, I guess you must have heard stories the Feds did the same thing to your neighbors.

    • gizmo

      Is Harry Reid Chinese?

      • gizmo

        If he is then GW Bush is muslin as he did not go after Osama and he let his relatives go quickly after 911

        • Nohea

          You deal with GW Bush…Geeze

        • Heff1583

          troll
          go lick obamas asshole

          • Kriegar

            I am getting so that I am not amazed by the incessant homosexual interest displayed by conservatives.

        • Kriegar

          GW Bush was muslim. That’s why they flew the Bin Laden family out of here lickety split. He might as well have been a muslim, at that point.

      • ray

        you have smoked way to much weed gizmo

    • gizmo

      And when someone is robbing you or trespassing on your land don’t expect help ever. Sure you probably have a gun but some robbers do not let you know they are coming

      • Nohea

        I stand corrected there are a lot of good Law Enforcement Officers, I would help. But those in this article I would not…To your dumb question below it says Harry Reid and the Chinese. Geeze

    • Robologix

      Nohea- I agree with you but, many new agent trainees are initially sent to the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center and many are not college grads, that must be why they act so stupid…..

      • o.k

        so youre saying that if you dont have a college degree that youre stupid.its about common sense and what right not college educated. I know alot of people with degrees with no common sense and are dumb at what they do.

  • gizmo

    I hope he wins because I would like to start a medicimal pot farm in Yellowstone.

    • Jesse

      fine with me

  • gizmo

    Um that is because they are saying government land is our land….

  • gizmo

    And my use of the land would benefit all the cancer patients….I would not do it for money….

  • gizmo

    So keep on fighting for this guy to use Federal land free of charge….I am all for it…

  • gizmo

    I love this sight!!!! lol

  • Vance

    Mr Clive Bundy is at the virgin river having a well deserved dinner. State sovereignty won this battle. Freedom is not free! Thank you Patriots for standing with Mr. Bundy

    • Kriegar

      I find it unlikely. I highly doubt that it is over yet.

  • LoneWiseMan

    Someone fill me in: why were his cattle not on his own property?

    • tick tack

      Because he is a careless rancher.

      • Kriegar

        Keep dreaming, whacko.

    • Tex

      They were on his property.

      • LoneWiseMan

        That’s not what I’m reading.

        I personally don’t own any government/public property. The people as a whole do. That doesn’t mean any individual in our society can just do whatever they want on public property.

        I hope you guys (although wouldn’t shock me) aren’t defending some millionaire rancher that has at least 500,000 cattle when he’s just leeching.

        • Kriegar

          What you’re saying is contrary to the facts, and the practices of cattle ranching in this area. And, as usual, the leech here is the government.

          This is land that has already been previously contracted for by the Bundy’s, from the BLM. The BLM has sought to change this contract, after having accepted fees. And now they want more. They have instituted plans to cull the tortoise population, and then claimed that the cattle are putting the tortoise in danger, and therefore need to be reduced, even after the fees were paid for them for service to be rendered. They have no intention of changing there fees schedule for value lost.

          The director of the BLM has close ties with Harry Reid, which stands in good evidence as to how he got his job. His son represents a firm that has been in negotiations with a Chinese company to arrange the purchase (not lease), of these lands to this Chinese Solar, or Wind energy company.

          Therefore, cronyism is being used to remove your public land from your public ownership, and turn it over to a private foreign corporate entity. At your cost, my cost, and the cost of this rancher, and other ranchers in the area. Ranchers who, in fact, have already been driven under by BLM’s shady practices.

          • LoneWiseMan

            Oh, okay. Of course, I’d have to understand the contract to see who is getting the raw end of the deal.

    • Kriegar

      Because that is not the way that open grazing works, or grazing permits, and other sundry little schemes thrust upon these ranchers by an ever encroaching government.

      • LoneWiseMan

        I’m ignorant on those topics, just always skeptical of millionaire “ranchers” and their tactics. I’ve lived around quite a few in my life.

  • Robologix

    Yeah!! the BLM would move forward with the sale of those cattle but would reportedly share the revenue with Bundy. Of course, another coverup by the corrupt agency, they can’t give em back live cattle, they made the mistake of shooting the cattle and bring a bulldozer to bury them.

  • Mario Hernandez

    It is ridiculous to see Ben Swann’s motto is “Truth in Media” when he is outright lying on this issue.

    “Federal land ownership began when the original 13 states ceded their “western” lands (between the Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi River) to the central government between 1781 and 1802. Substantial land acquisition in North America via treaties and purchases began with the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and culminated with the purchase of Alaska in 1867. In total, the federal government acquired 1.8 billion acres in North America.

    The U.S. Constitution addresses the relationship of the federal government to
    lands. Article IV, § 3, Clause 2 — the Property Clause — gives Congress authority over federal property generally, and the Supreme Court has described Congress’s power to legislate under this Clause as “without limitation.” The equal footing doctrine (based on language within Article IV, § 3, Clause 1), and found in state enabling acts, provides new states with equality to the original states in terms of constitutional rights, but has not been used successfully to force the divestment of federal lands. The policy question of whether to acquire more, or to dispose of any or all, federal lands is left to Congress to decide.”

    http://www.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/crsreports/crsdocuments/RL34267_12032007.pdf

    • Tex

      What’s your point Mario? The Government can’t own land because it is not a person. As far as I understand the Bundy family has been using the land for at least more then 20 years, so therefore by the John Locke homestead principle that family, or Mr. Bundy specifically, owns that land. I don’t care what some piece of paper says. All that matters are natural rights.

      • eggroll_jr

        You can’t acquire land by adverse possession from the federal government.

        • Brett Greshko

          But the Bundy’s have been on the land for 140 years, their claim predates federal control of the land. The government’s claim is bunk.

          • eggroll_jr

            Bundy’s land is a melon ranch in Bunkerville. On public lands, Bundy, like all of us, needs to apply for a grazing license. At the moment the fee is something like $1.35 per animal per month. There is no evidence the courts have found this not to pass Constitutional scrutiny or rise to a taking of real property. Nevada beef ranchers are undoubtedly under stress, even without this dispute. Much of Nevada is in severe drought conditions, and the desert has not been spared the cheatgrass invasion which has devalued much of the grazing in the Great Basin.

          • Kriegar

            Clearly, you have no idea of Bundy’s actual financial stake in this, nor the status of his permits, licenses, or paid fees. You also have slim to zero knowledge of contract law, or the contracts involved here.

            I sincerely suggest that you investigate Bundy’s position, and his argument further, before you swallow whole that of the BLM/Government’s. There are other facts in play here, and all is not nearly as cut and dried as you seem to think it is.

      • Mario Hernandez

        So you don’t care about the law? Got it.

        Also, the United States is a corporation (Act of 1871). Therefore it qualifies as a person in the eyes of the law.

        They have been using the land as part of an agreement (i.e. a contract). So we should just ignore those too because you feel like you and other people have the right to determine what qualifies as a “natural right”? Makes sense.

        I think there is a natural right to a million dollars. Can we enforce that now, too?

        • Lion Hawk

          So in other words when the Almighty Obama signs into law the

          National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, which also states they can take your property, detain you and make you disappear without due process, I’m supposed to accept that because it is the law? Are you a drug addict? Maybe you’re another government agent who has your head so far up Obama’s butt because your soul is bought and paid for by the Government. That sounds logical to me.

          • Mario Hernandez

            Aren’t you just lovely?

            First, no one said anything about the NDAA, and this situation has nothing to do with the NDAA. Do you like to distract from the topic at hand? Is that a discussion tactic you use often to distract from the fact that you don’t actually know what is going on?

            Also, accusing me of being a “government agent” because I am arguing the law is idiotic, at best.

            I really wish smart people were willing to engage in debate and discussion of ideas in a civil manner without resorting to name calling.

            You make me weep for this country.

          • jaketland81

            actually he was pointing out how the National Defense Authorization Act is similar to your argument because it represents how absurd civil law can be in comparison to common law where common law supersedes it with logical justice

          • Mario Hernandez

            Not really. It was an attempt to show that some laws should be deemed unconstitutional because he says so.

            Our Constitution set up a system that requires the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution and deem what is constitutional and unconstitutional. A citizen simply deeming something he thinks to be unconstitutional simply because he says so is such a ridiculous argument.

            The Supreme Court has interpreted federal ownership of land and completely disagrees with Bundy in this circumstance. Who are you or me to say they are wrong? Can we just declare all laws we don’t like unconstitutional?

          • QHorses

            I may be simple but judges generally dont seem fit to judge they lack experience and contain biases a machine is a machine. A robot could probably enforce the law more justly than judges

          • Kriegar

            Are you truly serious? Do you actually believe that any voter in this country supported, or voted for this law? Or that we wished our elected representatives to do so?

            And do you also contend, that because the Supreme Court, in an act of ultimate criminality, decided that a corporation is a person, that this is the truth????

            These claims that you make are specious. And the OP is not among a minority, in claiming that these things are unConstitutional. Do you not understand what the practice of Law means? And then you say “who are you or me(sic) to say they are wrong”?

            HELLO? We are The People of The United States of America. We ARE the Government. The Government OF the People, BY the People, FOR the People. These people, dear friend, serve at our pleasure. It is not the other way around, although some have been lulled into believing that it IS the other way around.

          • Lion Hawk

            I asked if you were. Since you think we should obey the law and you think what I brought has no bearing on this debate, I beg to differ. My whole point is the real American people are falsely being misrepresented by these laws. The NDAA trumped every law on the books and it has everything to with every American. Including these ranchers. Putting cross hairs on a rancher, his family and stealing his property is exactly what the law NdAA enables. If you don’t get that then I would regroup if I were you. You should weep for this country. It is a damn shame what this government is doing to real American folks who are doing their best to earn a living amiss the government corruption and the laws they pass to enable them to over power the people and the extortion fees they demand. Willing to kill Americans without due process over cows grazing on land that was county to begin with. So clearly was the message and now we all know where we stand. Is that better?

          • Kriegar

            Hell, we don’t need to even go so far as to talk about people putting food on the table. Let’s just talk about your ordinary Joe getting dragged through a rigged court for extortion fees, while maintaining an upright stance, and fighting for his legal rights.

            Were that we were all there, to stand with him.

          • QHorses

            The beauty of the country I fought for allows for all and spirited debate provides great ideas weeping is good emotion will drive motivation Keep on thinking for us all pardner

          • QHorses

            Nicely put! Now watch them all wake up a little when they don’t get their IRS extortion money back this year with a 1099 for the refund as income. Live Free

    • Reason and Justice

      Your comment is 100% BS.
      You are a stooge spreading disinformation.

      • Mario Hernandez

        Prove me wrong then. This was a paper written by constitutional scholars. Where did you get your law degree from? The University of I Am Too Chicken to Engage In Debate So I Will Just Call The Other Side Names?

        Sounds about right.

        • Brett Greshko

          Since you felt the need to post your “law scholar” thing twice, I’m going to repost my retort here as well:

          Originally, federal control was limited to a ten square mile area called District of Columbia and military use of land with State permission only. (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 – the “Enclave Clause”). The Property Clause of Article 4, Section 3 deals specifically with TERRITORIES of the US, not States. The control ends once a territory becomes a State, unless the State permits the federal government to use some land for the very limited purposes expressed in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17. The Founders supported this interpretation.

          Originally, these powers and interpretations were also upheld by SCOTUS (e.g., Fort Leavenworth Railroad v Lowe, Lessee of Pollard v Hagan, Permoli v Municipality No.1 of New Orleans, etc). Approaching the 20th century, with the government expansion by so-called “progressives”, SCOTUS started slowly changing the interpretation and meaning of the Property Clause (like they have with every limitation on federal gov’t). But just because “control” is stretched and manipulated “legally” doesn’t make it right, or consistent with the intent of the Constitution. No where in the list of Congress’ enumerated powers does the Constitution grant these powers to the Fed Gov’t. The people of this country should have stronger property rights than the federal government if we are truly to be considered free.

          Nevada’s Constitution requires that the state prove public need, and provide compensation and documentation to show eminent domain. The state must control the land in order to be able to grant it to the federal government. Not only has Nevada not given express permission or formal authority to the Fed Gov’t to control this land, even if they did they don’t have control over the land in the first place. The Bundy’s have controlled the land for the last 140 years. Nevada’s Constitution, Section 1 lists acquiring, possessing, and protecting private property as an inalienable right for its citizens.

          • Mario Hernandez

            So your argument boils down to “The Supreme Court got it wrong (in my opinion), therefore I don’t have to follow the law”?

            Is that really your argument?

            Did you even read the article (written by legal scholars) that I posted? I am assuming that you are a Constitutional scholar as well, right?

            SMDH.

          • Brett Greshko

            My argument boils down to the Founders and the earlier SCOTUS decisions got it right. The earlier SCOTUS had more insights into the intent of the framers, and the framers themselves told us what their intent was. Expansionists later changed the interpretations to favor federal power, which, as a student of law, I can tell you is quite a common theme from the 1920′s on. I can also tell you as a student of law, that quite often legal scholars get it wrong as well. There is no magic hat that legal scholars wear that magically makes them correct, and plenty of legal scholars have written papers taking the opposite of your view and supporting my view, as this is a hotly debated interpretation in the legal world.

            Nonetheless, it stands that the Property Clause directly expresses that it applies to territories and not States, and rules of statutory construction state that the plain meaning is to be given to statutory words unless directly expressed that there is another meaning.

  • andrea

    The ONLY danger is see here is that THEY have guns and tasers and dogs, the people have nothing, How fair or “just” is that! it has more and more become a standof of, military against their own people, whom they are supposed to defend and protect i might add.! but obama has it turned into a military sect of “Neigbor killers” , all that for 2300 dollars per month is that enough to kill a neihbor a sister , someone’s wife and daughter? I ask you Is that monthly Paycheck your payola for killing the ones you are to protect? I would be FURIOUS if anyone asked me to kill or hurt persons thats is paying my paycheck and the ones I am supposed to protect ,by OATH and rules of the very application form I /you filled out to do, and uphold! How much more UNAMERICAN can you get !??

    • Kriegar

      I would ask you to look back in history at this practice. It has nothing to do with Obama, historically. It has been an accepted, and repeated, practice. And it is criminally shameful.

  • Fundamental Transformation

    The truth is that the feds, states, counties and local municipalities are stealing land from people all across the U.S. by any means necessary. The preferred weapons, in most cases, are code violations and fines, arrests, physical violence and threats of violence.

    We stop this now or you will be next.

    No one who owns private property is immune to this. They intend to take everything you own at gunpoint if/when they disarm the public.

  • eggroll_jr

    A major function of the law is to resolve disputes without violence. Injunctions are equitable remedies to when the remedies at law are insufficient. Bundy’s cattle trespass should have been settled in 1998 had he complied with the court’s injunction to stop running his cattle on federal land. Alternatively, under the collateral bar rule, he could have paid the fine and kept running the cattle until the court removed the injunction and ruled in his favor. Instead, he did nothing to shore up his contempt position, which kind of forced the BLM’s hand. It was another 14 years before the court was forced to assert itself. That’s pretty patient. Still, it is bad form for either side to provoke violence at this point. It’s a matter of whether grazing rights have lapsed, and what measures the court can fashion to deal with Bundy’s contempt. While Bundy thinks that drawing the conflict out of court is preferable, it ultimately hurts trust in the law and is bad for law-abiding ranchers who pay their grazing fees.

    • Law Abiding Citizen

      Did it ever occur to you that the “law abiding rancher” is the one who doesn’t pay the extortion guised as a grazing fee?

      The “law abiding citizen” refuses to pay federal income tax to the illegal Federal Reserve.

      That’s the truth of the matter and it makes no difference how you try to spin it. I understand that people who obey the law put themselves at risk, but that does not make people who pay the illegal taxes “law abiding”.

      What they are is shameless cowards who are destroying the future for their children.

      • eggroll_jr

        So the 800 ranchers who pay their grazing permits in Nevada are “shameless cowards who are destroying the future for their children,” but the guy who flaunts the law (and does not avail himself of the remedies available to fight government overreach) is the hero?

        • Law Abiding Citizen

          Like I said, fruit loop, it doesn’t matter how you try to spin it.

          That’s like saying the Founding Fathers were dead wrong because they didn’t listen to the 95% majority who claimed that allegiance to England was “law abiding”.

          I don’t want to hear any of your mindless drivel. You are a despicable coward and that’s all you will ever be.

          • eggroll_jr

            Tranquilo, hermano.

          • rick

            Why the name calling. DUDE…..i.

          • Law Abiding Citizen

            Who are you calling a “dude” – punk?
            Say that to the wrong person and you will get your azz kicked.
            Practice what you preach – punk.

        • Lion Hawk

          Tell that to the 52 ranchers who did pay the extortion payments who no longer have a ranch. Yet people think when the government extorts your pay checks you have rights? I just see a bunch of babbling sheep who have drank to much water laced with fluoride. Don’t wake up. Don’t stand for anything. Give all your rights away to your beloved government who only sees you as a government issue like as in a number. As in social security number. If it was me, I would have all the farmers just stop busting their asses and let the government feed the clueless with all their GMO s. Same with all the commercial fisherman. These folks who work to put food on your table, literally bust their asses around the clock. They can’t leave and take a vacation. They also get paid less than a migrant worker after they pay all the extortion fees allocated by the government. So who is fooling who here? Better yet, why don’t you start a ranch and we can all watch how far you can bend over when the government tells you to. And we can all listen to the clueless wanting for you to bend over some more.

        • Kriegar

          I think that you would be best served to ask the ranchers directly. They appear to be in support of Bundy’s actions.

    • Kriegar

      You aren’t all that informed, are you?

    • john

      hes the last one, what does that tell you !

  • Lies Exposed

    More lame-stream-media lies exposed by the new MSM are happening constantly.

    If you are not listening to the so-called “alternative media” (The New Mainstream) you are an uninformed cretin.

    http://www.infowars.com/report-mainstream-media-lies-about-federal-standoff/

  • Lion Hawk

    $1.35 per cow which includes one calf, per month to graze on public lands. Lets round Bundy’s herd to 900 head and for the sake of discussion omit the calf count. So 900 X $1.35 X 12 = $14,580.oo per year to graze his herd. Let’s multiply by 20 years and we get $291,600 to graze for twenty years. This is a rough estimate. How much did the Feds want for their extortion fees? Just like dealing with the IRS. If you succeed then the FEDS steal it from you by whatever laws they choose. And by whatever agency they choose. I heard the extortion fees were about $2 million. Wouldn’t that bankrupt you if you were to bend over and submit to that outrageous demand?

  • Ronbo

    This would be considered a willful trespass so Bundy would be liable for 3 times the fees, plus cost of the roundup.

    • The Courts are Criminal

      What have you been smoking?

      The truth:

      The judge in this case is racketeering. That’s why it took so long for them to come after Bundy, because they know he’s right and hasn’t done anything wrong

      Bundy can file a “civil rico” and get three times the damages and the judge is personally liable.

    • Kriegar

      Bundy should be getting PAID treble damages, you mean.

  • MiamiEddy

    WHERE, WHERE are our Republican Politician???????????? There has not been a single one. Clive Bundy for Governor. There is oil and natural gas in the land.

  • Gatorback

    Iv

  • Enrique4

    Clive Bundy is like a cowboy Rosa Parks, He just won’t get up and go to the back of the bus.

  • Kriegar

    Don’t trust the bastids. Next thing you know, county planners will pull an eminent domain thing, or something.

    Get Reid, and his Chinese cronies OUT of there.

    • Ena Kana

      Racism is a losing position. So, you have chose to lose.

      • RednGoldtilimdeadandcold

        Krieger is not being racist he is citing a deal between Reid and Chinese investors over a solar energy project that was supposed to go in next to the Bundy ranch. Most supporters believe this is why the BLM was there in the first place.

  • Kriegar
  • me

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/cliven-bundy-ancestral-rights….looks like Lucy has some splaining to do…. just saying

  • Sanity Please

    Bundy and his followers should face criminal charges for contempt of court, threatening federal officials, and transporting firearms across state lines with the intent of committing an illegal act. Bundy should also be prosecuted for tax evasion. To all that I would add that he and
    his followers should be charged and prosecuted for sedition. I fail to understand why people are making heroes of people who are clearly violating the law and threatening violence against government officials who are enforcing existing law. Don’t like the law? Change it through
    the legislative process or seeking relief in the courts.