Victory for Nevada Cattle Rancher Cliven Bundy … BLM Blinks in Confrontation Over the Removal of Rancher’s Cattle From Federal Land, Government Claimed They were Grazing Illegally

The Bureau of land Management is pulling out, victory for Nevada cattle rancher Cliven Bundy.

The Feds and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have blinked in their Gestapo tactics of governmental overreach in the confrontation with Nevada cattle rancher Clive Bundy. No matter what side of the argument you fall on with regards to this situation, one thing is for certain, this was a complete over-reaction on the part of the Obama administration in creating this type of hostile, overreach and volatile situation. After a week-long standoff between the Feds and the cattle rancher and his supporters, the BLM has done a 180 most likely because there has been too much media reporting of the Fed’s tyrannical nad police state actions.  BLM Director Neil Kornze stated, “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.” More like, the memo came from on high, the Obama presidency cannot withstand a WACO.

However, the Bureau of Land Management vowed Saturday that it would continue its legal fight to remove illegal cattle from a rural Nevada range. This is code for the Fed’s in Washington DC will pull every stunt, behind the scenes, to make this man’s life miserable and put him out of business as he dared make them look bad in public.

BLM_Bundy

click on pic to watch BBC News Video – Pic: screen grab from video

ABC News: Nevada Cattle Rancher Wins ‘Range War’ With Feds.

 A Nevada cattle rancher appears to have won his week-long battle with the federal government over a controversial cattle roundup that had led to the arrest of several protesters.

Cliven Bundy went head to head with the Bureau of Land Management over the removal of hundreds of his cattle from federal land, where the government said they were grazing illegally.

Bundy claims his herd of roughly 900 cattle have grazed on the land along the riverbed near Bunkerville, 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas, since 1870 and threatened a “range war” against the BLM on the Bundy Ranch website after one of his sons was arrested while protesting the removal of the cattle.

“I have no contract with the United States government,” Bundy said. “I was paying grazing fees for management and that’s what BLM was supposed to be, land managers and they were managing my ranch out of business, so I refused to pay.”

The federal government had countered that Bundy “owes the American people in excess of $1 million ” in unpaid grazing fees and “refuses to abide by the law of land, despite many opportunities over the last 20 years to do so.”

However, today the BLM said it would not enforce a court order to remove the cattle and was pulling out of the area.

“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,” BLM Director Neil Kornze said.

“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,” he said.

Take a good look America at to how the Federal government is treating legal Americans. Attack dogs and tasering Americans, UNREAL. Remember when this used to be the United States of America, not a tyrannical police state? The Obama government does not do this to illegal aliens who come into America illegally, but they had no problem treating legal Americans this way.

Ranch Riot!!  Bundy Ranch Protesters Tasered by Federal Agents

UPDATE I: BLM return cattle back to Bundy’s. Iin the end, this was all for nothing.

A deal has been reached between Bundy family leaders and the Bureau of Land Management, but not without some very tense moments.

Armed Bundy family leaders met with BLM officers Saturday afternoon in Mesquite to discuss the fate of the Bundy’s cattle that the feds removed from BLM land, over the past week.

Under the deal the cattle were released from a holding area near Mesquite, back onto the federal lands they were removed from.

However, according to the BLM, the deal does not absolve Bundy from any of the fees he owes for having the animals there in the first place.

Rancher Cliven Bundy is not describing it as a deal, but as the American citizens taking back the cattle.

“There is no deal here. The citizens of America and Clark County went and took their cattle. There was no negotiations. They took these cattle. They are in possession of these cattle and I expect them to come home soon,” Bundy said.

9th Circuit Court Says the Second Amendment Protects the Right to Carry a Gun in California

From Per Eugene Volokh at the Washinton Post

Gun_2nd Amendment

So holds today’s Peruta v. County of San Diego (9th Cir. Feb. 13, 2014) (2-1 vote).

The court concludes that California’s broad limits on both open and concealed carry of loaded guns — with no “shall-issue” licensing regime that assures law-abiding adults of a right to get licenses, but only a “good cause” regime under which no license need be given — “impermissibly infringe  on the Second Amendment right to bear arms in lawful self-defense.”

This comes as quite a welcome surprise as the 9th Circuit Court is hardly considered conservative leaning in its rulings.

As the NRO opines, in other words the decision states that, one has the right to carry a gun. The state can elect to recognize this by permitting either “shall-issue” concealed-carry or “shall-issue” open carry, but it cannot restrict or prohibit both.

The FULL opinion can be read HERE.

City of Chicago Ban on Gun Sales Declared Unconstitutional by U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang

U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang has struck down Chicago’s law prohibiting the sale of guns within the city limits and declared in unconstitutional. In his ruling Judge Change said, “the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment must also include the right to acquire a firearm.”

Second_Amendment

Chicago law prohibiting the sale of guns within the third-most populous U.S. city was struck down as unconstitutional by a federal judge.

“Chicago’s ordinance goes too far in outright banning legal buyers and legal dealers from engaging in lawful acquisitions and lawful sales of firearms,” U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang wrote in a decision today.

The judge said he was delaying the effect of his ruling to allow the city time to seek a stay during an appeal or, if it elects to forgo an appeal, to consider and enact sales restrictions “short of a complete ban.”

Chicago Sun Times: Federal judge rules city ban on handgun sales unconstitutional.

City Hall attorneys had argued that the gun sale ban makes it harder for criminals to get their hands on weapons.

Chang agreed the city had a “fundamental duty” to protect its citizens and acknowledged that “the stark reality facing the City each year is thousands of shooting victims and hundreds of murders committed with a gun.”

But he wrote that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense “must also include the right to acquire a firearm.”

“If all cities and municipalities can prohibit gun sales and transfers within their own borders, then all gun sales and transfers may be banned across a wide swath of the country if this principle is carried forward to its natural conclusion,” he added.

Ted Nugent Says, ‘Trayvon Got Justice,’ as Anti-American Libs Try to Stop Free Speech … Calls Petitioners “Idiots” and “Subhuman Numbnuts” & Calls Out Barack Obama and Eric Holder

Whether you love him or hate him, Ted Nugent, the Motor City Madman rocker is allowed his “free speech” as afforded by the United States Constitution.

During an interview with Maine radio station WGAN, Nugent defended his recent comments regarding Trayvon Martin, blacks and crime and those that think that he should not play rock and roll in Connecticut were “idiots”. Those that have an issue with the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution have started a petition to prevent Nugent from performing at Toad’s Place in New Haven, CT. Really folks, this is how you direct your energies? Nugent called a group of petitioners who want his August gig at the nightclub Toad’s Place in New Haven canceled “subhuman numbnuts.” I guess it is safe to say that none of the “numbnuts” will be attending his concert. These same “idiots” are the ones who are claiming that “Justice for Trayvon” and wanting to get Attorney General Eric Holder and the DOJ to file a Civil Rights case against George Zimmerman. Oh the irony, as at the same time the collective “idiots” are trying to take away Ted Nugent’s freedom of speech. What a shock that there is a liberal double standard.

Ted Nugent stated that “Trayvon Martin got justice”. Personally, I think this is a poor choice of words because of how individuals define justice. What Trayvon Martin got was his day in court. Initially that is what Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Barack Obama, Martin’s parents and the liberal MSM wanted when they made this story a race issue and forced Florida to try the death of Trayvon after prosecutors in Sanford. FL had decided not to. But that is not what they really wanted, they wanted their pound of flesh from George Zimmerman. They were only after a guilty verdict no matter what the evidence showed. They could not accept a jury’s “not guilty” verdict in the case and now are seeking other avenues of going after Zimmerman. As if this case has not been exploited enough.

Ted Nugent expresses his views as only the ‘Motor City Madman’ can …

When asked about the “idiots” in Connecticut who think he “shouldn’t play rock and roll,” Nugent told the conservative host: “You and I stand on the line of reason” and must not be silenced.

“People who hate Ted Nugent hate freedom,” he said, and promised to continue to speak what he sees as the truth.

Nugent also had some choice things to say about liberals, racial activists and Trayvon Martin during the interview.

Defending his previous comments about blacks and crime, Nugent insisted the statistics bear him out.

Of the Trayvon Martin case, Nugent said, “Trayvon got justice.” He went on to say that Martin was a “gangsta wannabe” who had a “bloodthirst,” as evidenced by the fact that he was supposedly eager to “get into fights with people.” He said Martin showed racism in calling George Zimmerman a “cracka.”

Ted Nugent went on to say …

Nugent said Zimmerman got only a “sliver of justice.” Although Zimmerman was found not guilty, powerful people from President Barack Obama to Attorney General Eric Holder have targeted him, as have “Holder’s best friends,” the New Black Panthers. Nugent implied the president and Holder are trying to subvert the legitimate verdict in the case.

“It pains me deeply” to have to acknowledge that the president and some others in the administration are “just bad people,” Nugent said. He said he had hoped to be able to speak better of the country’s top officials.

Rasmussen Poll: 26% Of Obama’s Supporters View Tea Party As Nation’s Top Terror Threat … Liberalism Really is a Disease

The AMA does not need to made obesity a disease … they need to make Liberalism one.

According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 26% of those who approve of President Barack Obama’s job performance think that the Tea Party is a greater threat to America than radical Muslim. They don’t call these folks “moonbats” for nothing. As for those who actually have a functioning brain and who disapprove of Obama’s performance, 75% consider radical Muslims to be the bigger terrorist threat and just 1% are influenced by the MSM and name the Tea Party. It is rather remarkable that those who are for the US Constitution, limited government and balanced budgets is some how considered worse than those who would kill Americans. So sorry if the Tea Party believes in freedom and liberty. However, this is what happens when a Presidents makes more of an effort to have a war on its own citizens who express their First Amendment rights of Free Speech and a lapdog liberal MSM acts as a presidents propaganda arm to smear his political enemies rather than report the truth. UNREAL.

Must watch VIDEO … Yea, because these folks look and act like terrorists, unreal! (Tennessee Tea Party 4/15/09)

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters consider radical Muslims to be the bigger threat to the United States today. Thirteen percent (13%) view the Tea Party that way, and another 13% consider other political and religious extremists to be the larger danger. Six percent (6%) point to local militia groups. Two percent (2%) see the Occupy Wall Street movement as the bigger terrorist threat. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

However, among those who approve of the president’s job performance, just 29% see radical Muslims as the bigger threat. Twenty-six percent (26%) say it’s the Tea Party that concerns them most. Among those who Strongly Approve of the president, more fear the Tea Party than radical Muslims.

This is actually quite something. The far LEFT is truly deranged. Sorry, but I strongly oppose Barack Obama, his agenda and pretty much 99.9% of what he believes in, but I do not think the radical LEFT is a greater threat to America than Al-Qaeda. However, after this poll … maybe the radical, far LEFT is more dangerous.

The Daily Caller reminds us that the Tea Party has never committed an act of terror. Too bad the Leftist Occupy movement can’t say the same.

Top Secret Rules Allow NSA to Use US Data Without a Warrant … NSA Powers Wider than Thought

Like we did not think this already …

From the Drudge Report comes the following regarding the NSA, SECRET NSA POWERS WIDER THAN THOUGHT.

NSA_drudge

From the Guardian comes the news that the NSA powers are much more wider and intrusive that previously thought. Why is this not a shock? The Guardian is reporting that the top secret rules that allow NSA to use US data without a warrant. Huh, weren’t we told they always needed a warrant? It would appear Obama lied to us once again. Is it any wonder why many were so upset that Snowden blew the whistle on the NSA … Just how much of what they do is really known and is it Constitutional?

Top secret documents submitted to the court that oversees surveillance by US intelligence agencies show the judges have signed off on broad orders which allow the NSA to make use of information “inadvertently” collected from domestic US communications without a warrant.

The Guardian is publishing in full two documents submitted to the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (known as the Fisa court), signed by Attorney General Eric Holder and stamped 29 July 2009. They detail the procedures the NSA is required to follow to target “non-US persons” under its foreign intelligence powers and what the agency does to minimize data collected on US citizens and residents in the course of that surveillance.

The documents show that even under authorities governing the collection of foreign intelligence from foreign targets, US communications can still be collected, retained and used.

More from Mediaite: The Guardian: Info ‘Inadvertently Acquired’ By NSA ‘Can Be Retained, If It Is Useful’.

Much More at Drudge:

Spy agency can snoop without warrant…
… Keep data collected ‘inadvertently’
Lawyers eye for evidence in murder, divorce cases…
CLAIM: Top judges, generals, politicians wiretapped…
Judge’s one-paragraph order governs mass collection…
REPORT: SKYPE helped gov’t access customer data…
McConnell: Attack on free speech…
Govt to map your ‘every move’…

Senior Washington IRS Official Holly Paz Admits to Scrutinizing Tea Party Applications

IRS-GATE … Drip, drip, drip.

Holly Paz, an IRS senior supervisor in Washington, DC admitted to targeting Tea Party groups seeking tax-exempt status. She stated she was personally involved in scrutinizing up to 30 Tea Party applications. Now according to reports, she is gone, but gone where? Fired, transferred, on administrative leave with pay? One thing is for certain, it’s no longer about rogue agents in the Cincinnati office, the IRS scandal that targeted conservative groups and Tea Party organizations now leads to Washington, DC.

From FOX News:

A Washington-based IRS supervisor acknowledged she was personally involved in reviewing Tea Party applications for tax-exempt status as far back as 2010, Fox News confirms — a detail that further challenges the agency’s initial claim that the practice of singling out those groups was limited to a handful of employees in Ohio.

Congressional sources confirmed to Fox News that Holly Paz, who until recently was a top deputy in the division that handles applications for tax-exempt status, told congressional investigators she reviewed 20 to 30 applications. Some requests languished for more than a year without action.

The account undercuts the narrative that senior officials only learned of the practice after it had already started in the Cincinnati office.

Details of Paz’s role were first reported by The Associated Press. Still, Paz provided no evidence that senior IRS officials ordered agents to target conservative groups or that anyone in the Obama administration outside the IRS was involved.

Instead, Paz described an agency in which IRS supervisors in Washington worked closely with agents in the field but didn’t fully understand what those agents were doing. Paz said agents in Cincinnati openly talked about handling “tea party” cases, but she thought the term was merely shorthand for all applications from groups that were politically active — conservative and liberal.

The Gateway Pundit provides an important little tidbit of information, Holly Paz was a Barack Obama donor.

14 Year Old Student Jared Marcum May Face Year in Jail For Refusing to Remove NRA Shirt in School

Good grief, we can’t seem ta arrest any one at the IRS for illegally targeting conservative organizations or any one at the Justice department for AP or James Rosen-gate, but the some how we are able to jail a 14 year old for freedom of speech.

We had previously reported that 8th grader Jared Marcum, who attended the Logan Middle School in West Virginia had been arrested, suspended and faced charges for wearing an NRA T-shirt with the image of a firearm and the words “Protect Your Right” printed on it to school. School officials actually called the police on this kid for wearing a shirt to school and expressing his “freedom of speech”. This is still America, right? But now we learn that the case has not been dropped and that Jared Marcum could face a year in jail. HUH? As stated at Guns Saves Lives, how on Earth have these charges not yet been dropped? This entire incident was caused by an over-reaction by school officials and now it has gotten so far out of control that it could lead to an American citizen expressing their Constitutional rights.

WTRF 7 News Sports Weather – Wheeling Steubenville

According to a report by WTRF the prosecuting attorney is moving forward with that charge and a judge is allowing the case to move forward. Fourteen year old Jared Marcum could face up to a $500 fine and up to a year in jail (we’ll seriously hope that isn’t a real possibility) if found guilty.

According to the report, the arresting officer alleges that when Jared refused to stop talking he hindered the officers ability to do his job and that is where the obstruction arrest came from. I’m guessing a 14 year old kid who felt intimidated was trying to explain himself, but let’s throw him in jail for good measure.

According to the report, both the prosecuting attorney and police refused to comment or answer any questions from reporters regarding the case.

When did this country get so screwed up? Does anyone think he would be facing the same predicament if his shirt was “anti-gun” or maybe if it was pro-Muslim” or pro “illegal immigration”. Weasel Zippers says, STOP THE INSANITY!!! When will some one in authority use an ounce of common sense and just drop the charges?

Talk About Hipocrisy … In 2006 Joe Biden Said, Don’t Trust a Spying President or Vice President, What Say You Now Joe? According to Gallup, Majority of Americans Don’t Either

Americans appear to be very troubled by the government spying on them. Hmm, so was Joe Biden when he was in the US Senate.  In 2006, then Senator Joe Biden said you can’t trust a spying president.

“If I know every single phone call you made I’m able to determine every single person you talk to. I can get a pattern about your life that is very, very intrusive. The real question here is what do they do with this information they collect that does not have anything to do with Al-Qaeda? And we’re going to trust the president and the vice president of the United States that they’re doing the right thing. Don’t count me in on that.“

But of course now that Biden is VP and Barack Obama is President, things are different. NOT! The NSA surveillance program as morphed into an all encompassing, out of control data grab on ever single American and in the process completely shredding the Contribution and Bill of Rights. For something that Biden said, “don’t count me in on that,” he appears to be all in now. What’s the difference? Oh, he is in power. Talk about your convenient flip-flops and the height of hypocrisy. Now that Biden is VP, he must feel it is completely OK to shred the US Constitution and spy on law abiding American people. Because the rules don’t apply the liberals. How does one morph their opinion that you can’t trust a spying president simply by whether they are a ”R” or “D”? Especially when the Obama administration has already been caught in the IRS scandal where conservative groups were targeted?

As Liberty Unyielding opines, “aren’t you glad we didn’t elect an idiot like Sarah Palin to be one heartbeat away from the president?”

It would appear We the People” are not for a spying president either. According to a recent Gallup poll, a majority of Americans disapprove of the NSA Government surveillance program. 53% of Americans disapprove of the “Big Brother” watching them and violating their right to privacy. Weasel Zippers provides a similar CBS poll where 58% disapprove of the Government surveillance program. The only group who approves, are Democrats. Funny, weren’t they the ones that were up in arms during the GWB presidency that their library books were being reviewed?

More Americans disapprove (53%) than approve (37%) of the federal government agency program that as part of its efforts to investigate terrorism obtained records from U.S. telephone and Internet companies to “compile telephone call logs and Internet communications.”

There are significant partisan differences in views of the government’s program to obtain call logs and Internet communication. Democrats are more likely to approve, by 49% to 40%. Independents (34% vs. 56%) and Republicans (32% to 63%) are much more likely to disapprove than approve.

CNN asks, Was it OK for Snowden to leak secrets? The question is debatable as the jury is still out as to what his ultimate motive was.

ACLU Files Lawsuit Challenging NSA’s Patriot Act Phone Surveillance Against We the People … Violates Americans’ Constitutional Rights of Free Speech, Association & Privacy

Once again we are witness to a government that has become just too big.

As reported at the New York Times, the ACLU has filed a aw suit against the federal government challenging the NSA’s phone surveillance against “We the People”. In an interesting twist, the left leaning ACLU has filed a law suit against the far-Left Obama administration over the collection of logs of domestic phone calls of all Americans where they were the target of an investigation or suspected of terrorism or not. The law suit names Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, NSA Director Keith Alexander, Attorney General Eric Holder, Defense Secretary Charles Hagel and FBI Director Robert Mueller III as defendants. It is pretty bad when the ACLU is forced to sue the Obama administration over such an issue, or face a complete lack of credibility.

ACLU

The American Civil Liberties Union sued the Obama administration on Tuesday over its “dragnet” collection of logs of domestic phone calls, contending that the once-secret program — whose existence was exposed last week by a former National Security Agency contractor — is illegal and asking a judge to stop it and order the records purged.

The lawsuit could set up an eventual Supreme Court test. It could also focus attention on this disclosure amid the larger heap of top secret surveillance matters revealed by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor who came forward Sunday to say he was their source.

I have personally disagreed with many actions in the past and inactions by the ACLU, who is supposed to defend all Americans civil liberties. However, I have to give them credit here. The ACLU filed a law suit charging that the program violates Americans’ constitutional rights of free speech, association, and privacy.  It is troubling that the US government thinks that it can just sweep up all data without any cause of legal search and seizure. It is even more eye opening that Barack Obama when he was Senator and candidate Obama ridiculed and vilified this program. When he became president, the program went on steroids.

In the wake of the past week’s revelations about the NSA’s unprecedented mass surveillance of phone calls, today the ACLU filed a lawsuit charging that the program violates Americans’ constitutional rights of free speech, association, and privacy.

This lawsuit comes a day after we submitted a motion to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) seeking the release of secret court opinions on the Patriot Act’s Section 215, which has been interpreted to authorize this warrantless and suspicionless collection of phone records. [...]

The ACLU’s complaint filed today explains that the dragnet surveillance the government is carrying out under Section 215 infringes upon the ACLU’s First Amendment rights, including the twin liberties of free expression and free association. The nature of the ACLU’s work—in areas like access to reproductive services, racial discrimination, the rights of immigrants, national security, and more—means that many of the people who call the ACLU wish to keep their contact with the organization confidential. Yet if the government is collecting a vast trove of ACLU phone records—and it has reportedly been doing so for as long as seven years—many people may reasonably think twice before communicating with us.

Legal Insurrection reminds us that this was not the first law suit filed when it comes to the NSA data dragnet, Larry Klayman, former chairman of ‘Judicial Watch’ filed one as well.

On Sunday, a similar suit was filed by Larry Klayman, former chairman of Judicial Watch, against President Obama, Eric Holder, Keith Alexander, the NSA and Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam, among others.  The suit claims that the government’s phone surveillance activities “violates the U.S. Constitution and also federal laws, including, but not limited to, the outrageous breach of privacy, freedom of speech, freedom of association, and the due process rights of American citizens.”

Next Page →

Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

 
 
  • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
  • Red (comments)
  • Dugga (technical issues)
  • Dana (radio show comments)
  • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Close
E-mail It