@Dan MaloyI disagree. Had the Bundys simply obeyed the law none of this
would have happened and Lavoy would still be alive. How can they remain in good
standing in a church with an article of faith such as that 12th one?
Next time you thank a service man for his service, ask him how he feels about
risking his life for people like Bundy and the failure of our justice system.
@ Michael_M - Scottsbluff, NE - Jan. 11, 2018 2:47 a.m. - "What ever
happened to the 12th Article of Faith?"It's still there.
And practiced, often, even by the Bundys.Here's my
questions:1 - Whatever happened to the FIRST part of the 12th
Article of Faith?2 - Whatever happened to the First Amendment?3 - Whatever happened to the Tenth Amendment?
Article quote: "This fight over Western land is not new, nor is it well
understood by people who live in other parts of the country. In Utah, 66 percent
of the land is federally owned. In Nevada, it’s 84.9 percent; and in
Oregon, 53 percent."Do I think our federal government has a
"right" to own land here in America?Of course.Military bases and the associated military training grounds, federal court
houses, government offices, etc have to be put somewhere. But a
whopping 66% of Utah?Over half of Oregon?And poor Nevada only gets
to own a measly 15.1% of what's within its OWN borders?That
isn't called "fair", that's called "government
over-reach". That's called "unrighteous dominion".
That's also called legalized "theft".To those who claim
the Bundys don't know what's in the Constitutions they carry around in
their pockets, I bet they understand the 10th Amendment very, very well.
Jay - I disagree. The federal government, as a whole, IS the
problem. In this case it was one single, solitary judge who spanked the entire
federal government.Thank the Lord for people with a spine.
They Feds were amazingly arrogant and consistently over-apply their authority.
This could have been a tragic disaster like in Waco, Texas. These matters need
to be managed more cautiously.
Thank you blarson for doing your homework and knowing of what you speak. You
made excellent points.
Yes, in a sense the Federal Government protected Bundy's rights . . . but
he had to go to court and expose massive overreach by that government to escape
incarceration. As the judge noted that oh-so protective Federal Government
engaged in "reckless disregard for constitutional obligations." And
unlike the defense, whose job is to represent the client zealously within the
bounds of the law, the prosecutor's mandate is to "seek justice."
Between seeing a bloated federal bureaucracy that lacks accountability and the
ATF, BLM, and the like fielding SWAT teams, I'm getting a little nervous
about my rights.
@2 bitsBundy ignored multiple federal court orders to remove his
cattle from federal land. When the final court order authorizing the BLM to
forcibly remove his cattle was made, Bundy threatened violence verbally, and
called for armed resistance to that legal court order. Bundy supporters trained
loaded weapons on federal agents. Bundy and supporters directly interfered
with federal agents attempting to enforce a court order.Any and all
of those items are grounds for arrest.
@blarson"The fact is that LaVoy Finicum could have been picked
up at almost anytime before his attempt to travel to another location outside of
the county with no danger to anyone. Period. Full stop."Absolutely false. Full stop.Lavoy Finicum's truck and one
other vehicle were pulled over well before the roadblock. Finicum told law
enforcement they would need to shoot him to prevent him from travelling to the
meeting in the next town. The other vehicle stayed and surrendered
to authorities. Finicum sped away, crashed a roadblock, exited the vehicle and
was shot reaching for a gun. Multiple videos, including one taken from inside
his own truck verify Finicum's comments and actions before his death.
RE: "federal agencies commanding “armies,”...Armies like
the ATF that kill their own citizens (not enemies abroad) I might add.People think the biggest mass killings in the USA were by a crazy kid at Sandy
Hook (26), or a radicalized Muslim in Orlando night club (49), or a crazed
gunman in Las Vegas (58). But the largest loss of life was when the ATF
attacked the religious group in Waco Texas (80+ men women and children died when
the ATF attacked the people in the compound 23 years ago).Not crazy
people, or radicalized Muslims, but radicalized government workers carried out
the largest mass murder in America so far.===So many
(like OMM) are saying "Bundy and his group deserve to be in JAIL!"...---What group needs to go to jail? And for what? They were protesting.
Not a shot was fired by Buddy or any protester.Did anybody go to
jail when the guy who protested in Oregon was shot and killed for trying to get
away after their protest?Protesting is not a Death Penalty offense
people.Disagreeing with your government is not a Death Penalty
offense.Exercising your right to bear arms is also not a Death
Clive Bundy and his family take up arms against law enforcement - and he is a
cult hero to the hard right crowd. Meanwhile the same crowd view black
football players taking a knee during the anthem protesting police abuse as
treasonist. How is the threat of direct violence and killing of
police deemed ok in one instance, while protesting the police killing of suspect
viewed as anti-American.We live in strange times.
What ever happened to the 12th Article of Faith?
All the back and forth misses one extremely important fact.The
Bundy's committed an act of domestic terrorism. And they got off on the
technicalities rather than full redemption from a jury.
The dismissal of this case doesn’t prove whether bundy was innocent or
guilty. It only shows that prosecutors messed up.The dismissal of
this case also doesn’t lend any credibility to Bundys cause. He is still a
man who owes money for grazing.
My, after watching the whole NFL kneeing fiasco go ballistic -- it will
certainly be interesting to wait and see how the Trump Administration deals with
this sort of "heavily armed insurrection against the Federal Government"
sort of conflict...
Hey blarsen -Re: "There is no evidence he’s was reaching
for a gun.". . . Except for the video and the officers'
statements.Re: "What happened to LaVoy Finicum was cold blooded
murder. The perps still have to be brought to justice."Guess
what . . . Even police officers have a right to defend themselves.
While the author is correct that in the end the system worked, it failed before
it finally did. Greg Burleson was given a life sentence this past year, because
he did not have 33000 pages of evidence the Bundys had access to. The system
failed because, no matter how you slice it the indictment contained false
information, based on false claims and out right lies. Because of that they were
jailed for over 650 days, and Cliven 700, and combined they now owe half a
million in legal expenses. The Bundy's have every right to be disgusted
and to continue to be skeptical of the system and the government that
GaryO, again.The fact is that LaVoy Finicum could have been picked
up at almost anytime before his attempt to travel to another location outside of
the county with no danger to anyone. Period. Full stop.There is no
evidence he’s was reaching for a gun. He had his hands up and could have
been easily talked down and detained. Watching the video closely show a man
crouched by the back of the car pointing a gun at him. Just after LaVoy reached
for his upper left breast/shoulder, the man scooted away out of camera range.
The strong implication is that he fired a dummy round to hit LaVoy in that area
so Lavoy WOULD reach for it, and so they would be justified in gunning LaVoy
down.There is an excellent video you should watch that meticulously
goes through every step of the extant videos, showing exactly what happened, and
where and in what time frame they happened. The overwhelming evidence points to
a deliberate set up. What happened to LaVoy Finicum was cold blooded
murder. The perps still have to be brought to justice.
in time justice will prevail our government is still learning what is correct
but we are all human beings with God given rights to freedom of conciense and
actions to right the wrongs that are sent against us Jay you did your best to
portray the facts in this case thank you
Hey NoNamesAccepted -Re: "In the Bundy Nevada case, nobody
died precisely because the citizens presented a credible resistance."WrongActually, the OPPOSITE happened.Finicum
died because he was armed and appeared to be going for his gun. I've seen
the video. Had he not been armed, he would still be alive today."I would rather die than be caged." - LaVoy FinicumHe
died. The others were caged for a short while. The choice was his to make, and
he made it.
@Open Minded Mormon: "No - the irony is: a single unarmed ... black man ...
heavily armed White men"Is this "irony" or is this
natural outcomes? The lone, weak, aged, or slow often fall victim to predators.
The strong, the many, and fast, the armed have a better chance to survive.Ruby Ridge, Waco, WVC & Danielle Willard, Michael Brown, Baltimore,
Bundys in Nevada.If you admit the possibility of abuse of government
power and bogus charges in some of these cases, why do refuse to even consider
the same may be possible in others? Racists figure inner city blacks have it
coming. What do we call the man who figures rural ranchers, or fringe religious
folks deserve it?"Bundy and his clan deserve to be in
JAIL!"A United States federal judge who has shown zero bias in
favor of the Bundys, indeed, quite the opposite, says otherwise. Do you support
the system? Or do you have the same kinds of concerns about injustice that many
on the right have?Justice cannot be partial to one race or zip code
vs another. If you recognize the potential for government to unjustly gun down
innocent black men, you must also recognize that same potential when it comes to
@wasatchcascade: "In the Nevada setting, Bundy supporters had ten times the
number of snipers perched, all with their guns pointed at BLM and federal
agents."Two thoughts:1-If I point a gun at a man
without "reasonable man" belief that he poses an imminent, grave risk to
my life or limb, I have committed a serious crime. Those upset over Bundy
supporters having or pointing guns are really upset about them doing so in the
supposed absence of a legitimate need for self defense against criminal
violence.But, we've learned it was the BLM who first pointed
guns at the Bundy family even when all of their own, best intel told them the
Bundys were not violent. When a man points a gun at me without
justification, that man now becomes the criminal and has given me
"reasonable man" belief to fear for my safety.2-Rural
residents learned the sad lessons of Ruby Ridge, Waco, the WVC Danielle Willard
case, and too many cases involving black young men. When the government vastly
outguns the citizens, government agents get a little trigger happy and innocent
people die. In the Bundy Nevada case, nobody died precisely because the
citizens presented a credible resistance.
To “wasatchcascade” Got any more hyperbole you can throw at the
Bundy controversy? E.g., :Bundy supporters had ten times the number of snipers
perched, all with their guns pointed at BLM and federal agents”. This is
simply an exaggerated lie.And the Bundy’s don’t just
claim to be part of the LDS fold. They’re members in good standing, last
I heard. Then there’s the snide comment about “Captain
Moroni”.But yes, the Bundy actions do constitute a
“political prism on a most pressing issue”. The real issue is
government overreach and the illegal actions they, themselves resort to, some of
which were outlined by Judge Navarro, but not all.And of course,
you’d want to throw racial identity politics into the mix, usually
utilized by left-leaning individual/groups to obscure real issues.Curious. How do you feel about the LDS Hammond family being convicted twice
(double jeopardy) for so-called terrorist activity on their ranch for a
Jay, innocent men (which is what they legally are at this time) have spent
upwards of 2 years in jail, away from family, unable to operate their business,
incurring massive legal bills, after having valuable livestock shot, tortured,
killed, and left to waste.To have the charges dismissed with
prejudice--to be effective ruled "innocent"--is not justice.Either the BLM and prosecutors hounded innocent men and violated their rights,
or some very dangerous, guilty men have been allowed to skate due to grossly
unprofessional, illegal, unconstitutional conduct by our agents. In either
case, justice demands that those responsible (BLM supervisors, head prosecutor)
be prosecuted for their crimes.Justice demands that innocent men be
compensated for their property (livestock) that was destroyed, for their time
unjustly incarcerated, and for the violation of their due process rights.Thus far, the system isn't working very well. We didn't
convict men in violate of due process. But the system has greatly wronged them
while failing to prove any punishment was justified.Surely, we
expect a higher bar than that.
Re: "The federal government system they portray as the enemy just protected
their rights from abuses of power, precisely as it was designed to do."True.The Federal government is Cliven Bundy's
benefactor. And yet he shows no appreciation. He didn't even say thank
you.The Federal Government, given to us by the Founding Fathers via
the U.S. Constitution, benefits all American citizens. That's what
government was DESIGNED to do. It promotes the general welfare. Many of us
appreciate that fact.The Bundy's do not appreciate it. The
Bundy's and others like them are defined by their narrow minds, their
ingratitude to our nation, and by their greed.Why is it we should
not "cast pearls before swine?" . . . It's because swine cannot
appreciate those pearls.Modern "conservatism" has created a
whole herd of people like the Bundys . . . Greedy, grasping, unthinking, and
ungrateful souls who demand much from our nation but refuse to give anything
The Bundy's are not "the good guys"; they're thieves who have
been stealing from the rest of us for decades.
Putting a political prism on a most pressing issue, violence that accompanies
cultural and political angst. In the Nevada setting, Bundy supporters had ten
times the number of snipers perched, all with their guns pointed at BLM and
federal agents. And Bundy's for years have scoffed at Federal grazing fees
and Court Orders backing up those assessments. And the young Bundy's
barged right in to a Federal Facility in Oregon and took up residence. And in
both cases, politicians, either supported them or acted in a sympathetic manner.
And the Bundy clan all claim to be part of the LDS fold and often tender
constitutional and scriptural messages to support their actions. Captain Moroni
came forward in Oregon and even in Nevada. Those that endorse these activities
and views - showing up in mass with high capacity assault rifle type weapons and
scoffing at basic public land use practices? Had these men been "Black,
Hispanic or Muslim" don't you just imagine that their "dance and
parade" would have lasted (not long) for how many hours or days? Resolving
conflicts in modern society? The Bundy way? Or, are there other options?
@mcclark, I think the $8K amount was what was brought up at trial. The last
grazing fee that Cliven Bundy attempted to pay to Clark County was $1.9K for
'93 to '94. Assuming a constant fee rate over 20 years, that comes to
$38K, a far cry from $1million.Technically, the BLM canceled the
grazing contract w/ Bundy's in 1994. The money that the BLM claims is owed
is for grazing trespass fines. However, the BLM when requested via FOIA has not
produced an account of what they claim the Bundy's owe and why. Seems like
someone just pulled a very big number out of the air to justify the BLM actions
against the Bundy's.@TheEducator, of the people in the
spotlight that are LDS, The Bundy's are in the minority that does not cause
me embarrassment.@Freiheit, The Courts give opinion, what they say
goes, as long as it is in accordance with the Constitution. If/when they try to
make unconstitutional laws from the bench that is when the 2nd amendment is put
to the test.
JimInSLC claims: "The grazing fees that the Bundy's did not pay to the
BLM amount to about $8K, the other $992K claimed to be owed is, I assume,
penalties and interest. "Honesty just doesn't work for the
conspiracy conservative, does it.Your 8k doesn't even cover one
year at the lowest rate, and he hasn't paid in 25 years, your math is
horrible, but I suspect your just repeating radio nonsense instead of actually
researching it.The mess was created by a cheat and a thief,
Bundy.To defend him is to defend lawlessness and theft of property by a
terrorist clan.Good people don't threatin to shoot public
servants.Black guy takes a knee and the conservatives loose it.Rednecks takeover a government building with an armed insurrection, and
conservative applaud their protest?
Mr. Evensen says: “The federal government system they portray as the
enemy just protected their rights from abuses of power, precisely as it was
designed to do.” Three things are wrong with this statement:
saying the Bundy’s portray “the federal government system . . . as
the enemy”, could be called a sweeping generalization, and a bifurcation
or black-and-white logical error, as well as being misrepresentations of their
position. The Bundy’s support the federal government system
when it stays within the bounds of the Constitution. They are against federal
overreach and criminality of action. Why indeed, as Bundy asked, are simple
government agencies able to bring what amounts to armies against citizens, and
to commit their own illegal actions with no repercussions?And you
think the Bundy’s and their supporters somehow don't understand that
the government worked in their favor? I'm sure they are very grateful that
the government (i.e., Judge Navarro) acted as it was supposed to. There is
simply no irony warranted. The rest of your statements in the
article indicate you have no compunction to address or recognize government
overreach or government criminality.
Bundy owes me and fellow taxpayers millions of dollars. We aren't letting
this welfare queen go without a fight. I have confidence that we will get him. I
want my money back. Anyone else remember when Hannity couldn't cheerlead
Bundy enough? But then suddenly dropped him after he said something? Anyone
remember what Bundy said? So lets stop making Bundy out to be some
hero. He's a criminal and a completely embarrassment to the LDS faith. Get Educated
Irony? Like in "crime pays"?
This is far from over....mobster Al Capone was never found guilty of
running a mob, murderer, ordering hits, gambling, extrotion, or bootlegging
alcohol....Al Capone died alone in jail for tax evasion....
I would be very interested to know "how many" government snipers were at
the ranch. Also, did those protesters know they were there?Mr
Evensen: Please give a report on the status of Mr Bundys grazing rights. The
courts have ruled that he owes money but why hasnt his "grazing rights"
been lost because of not paying those fees.
To those supporting Bundy are you also supporting the right for Americans to
disregard the rulings of our courts or just the actions the BLM took to get what
was owed to the general public? Bundy kept sending his grazing fees to the
State of Nevada who returned them and said to resubmit to the BLM as they are
the landlords for the American people's lands. Bundy refused to
acknowledge the Federal government as the rightful owner and the courts
instruction to pay them. He may have won the battle but it's best he
losses the war or we'll have anarchy on our hands out on our public lands
mcclark: "For a bunch of folks who carry a copy of the Constitution in
their pockets they don't seem to know much about it. It clearly states that
the Supreme Court decides what is and what isn't Constitutional." It
says no such thing. The power of the Court to decide constitutionality of
congressional legislation grew slowly from Marbury v Madison and the Dred Scott
case (54 years apart) to general acceptance now. It is presently part of our
system, but it is not in the Constitution.
Thid, the matter was settled in court, several times. The Bundy's refused
to obey the courts findings. Jim, $8,000.00 divided by 20 years (the time they
have refused to pay) equals $400 per year. I dont think so.
@ Impartial: If Bundy had been grazing his cattle for free, the government
should have put a lien on his cattle and settled the issue in court, not come in
with helicopters, military vehicles and guns to abuse and threaten him and his
family! What the government did was wrong, unless you live in Iran or N. Korea!
That's the difference!
The grazing fees that the Bundy's did not pay to the BLM amount to about
$8K, the other $992K claimed to be owed is, I assume, penalties and interest.
The Fed Govt has spent over an estimated $6 million to try to collect those
fees. It is not about the money.In 1993 there were 53 ranchers in
Clark County Nevada area; The majority of them I have to assume complied and
paid grazing fees to the BLM. Today, all but 1 has been pushed off their
property and the land acquired by special interest groups.I'm
glad that the Bundy's are out of prison, though I would have liked to have
the trial concluded with a decision by the Jury, which I'm certain would
have been favorable to the Bundy's. Judge Navarro did a great service to
the feds by calling the mistrial with prejudice to prevent the BLM from pursuing
this mess they created.
Well said, and I don't mind pointing out often as not federal police power
has been directed against the left, like when J Edgar Hoover was running the
FBI. We on the left need to remember this.
For a bunch of folks who carry a copy of the Constitution in their pockets they
don't seem to know much about it. It clearly states that the Supreme Court
decides what is and what isn't Constitutional. The Supreme Court has ruled
several times that the Federal Government can own and administer land. But they
reject that finding, in effect rejecting the Constitution.
And I bet they still have not paid their grazing fees.No colored man
or a person with a Hispanic surname could possibly get away with what the Bundys
got away with.
While I don't agree with the methods used by the Bundys, I'm afraid
the greater risk to our country is the lack of trust in our federal government
that is spreading because of their repeated unwillingness to follow the law.
@1covey;"As to land use, it is time to stop the power struggle and
come together on some reasonable, well - considered agreements involving all
concerned parties. Again, local, county, state and federal levels need to sit
down and sort it out. "That's not what Bundy wants. He
believes that it's his entitled right to craze his cattle, for free, on any
land that is owned by the Feds, State, or local governments. He's not
seeking a solution, he wants free grazing.
So, the system works; how well does it work when there is so much trouble or, in
some cases, harm done ? As to land use, it is time to stop the power struggle
and come together on some reasonable, well - considered agreements involving all
concerned parties. Again, local, county, state and federal levels need to sit
down and sort it out. Everybody could benefit.
" America is acting like this dismissing charges against people accused of
serious crimes because it values due process and the rights of its
citizens." Not a Bundy fan. However, the prosecutors acted in
bad faith. The case was thrown out-rightly so. However, this doesn't mean
that Bundy is exonerated. He's still a welfare rancher that owes American
taxpayers over 1 million in unpaid grazing fees.
Using the same logic, I suppose Narcan proves that Heroin won't kill
you?The Bundy case shows just how vigilant we must be about
tyrannical government. We can thank God that the checks and balances our
nation's founders incorporated into the constitution worked this time. They
are clearly necessary.
Great article. The Fed's handled this issue terribly from the seizing of
the cattle to the court case. The Bundy's have handled their arguments
with the federal government poorly. The Bundys need to be held accountable for
breaking the laws of our country otherwise it encourages more anarchy.
In 1992 Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi, and FBI sniper, shot and killed Vicki Weaver at
Ruby Ridge, Idaho. That the time she was shot she was holding her 10-month old
baby.On Sunday February 28, 1993, Mr. Horiuchi was in Waco, Texas
when our Federal Government burned 76 Branch Davidian men, women, and children
to death.I support our government but yes, they have been known to
lie, steal and cheat just like the criminals they go after.
In human history governments abusing their citizens is the norm, not the
exception! I am happy that in America, an exceptional nation, the good guys can
The Bundy's and their supporters deserved to spend a lot of time in prison
for what they did both in Nevada and Oregon. The fact that they got off on a
technicality doesnt change the facts of what they did. If
prosecutors are guilty of what the judge says then THEY should be at least fired
if not prosecuted.
115 years? "To put things in context, it’s helpful to
remember that in June 1913, Western governors met in Salt Lake City to send a
message to the new administration of President Woodrow Wilson that the states,
not the Department of Interior, ought to manage public lands.Here we
are, 115 years later, and the arguments continue."
No - the irony is:a single unarmednon-threatening black mancan get shotfor doing absolutely nothingwhile
-- this large GROUP of heavily armed violence threatening White menwalk free for staging an armed stand off with police.Bundy and his clan deserve to be in JAIL!