Range War: Feds vs The People

[American Patriot]

Feds Seizes Property of New Mexico Ranchers for a Mouse; County Orders Local Sheriff to Stop the Feds

15 Thursday May 2014
Posted by bydesign001 in Uncategorized
≈ 2 Comments

Tags
BLM, federal land grab, green tyranny, meadow jumping mouse, Otero County New Mexico

[COLOR=#]Rate This[/COLOR]

Watchdog.org (by Rob Nikolewski)
SANTA FE, N.M. — It hasn’t reached the fever-pitch of the showdown involving Cliven Bundy, but a handful of ranchers in southern New Mexico have locked horns with the federal government.
Their complaint? Officials at the U.S. Forest Service have fenced off access to water for the ranchers’ grazing cattle because the feds want to protect the habitat of the meadow jumping mouse, which is expected to be listed as an endangered species next month.
The Forest Service says it is worried cattle will damage 23 acres along the Agua Chiquita that includes a natural spring it says is essential the protect the ecosystem for the mouse.
Ranchers are angry the feds have reinforced locks and fences to keep out their cattle, thirsty from a long drought that has hit New Mexico. Besides, they say, the land belongs to a local rancher.
‘The Forest Service has no right to appropriate water under New Mexico law,’ Blair Dunn, an attorney for Otero County, told New Mexico Watchdog.
But the Forest Service disagrees and says the fences have been in place since the 1990s and the creek itself is on federal property.
‘We’ve provided reasonable access to the water, even if there is a water right on these sites,’ Forest Supervisor Travis Moseley told KVIA-TV.
Tensions are rising.
On Monday, Otero County Commissioners voted 2-0 to authorize Sheriff Benny House to open the gate.
‘I’ve never seen one of these mice, and the Forest Service claims they caught one last year,’ Commissioner Tommie Herrell told Reuters.
The endangered listing for the meadow jumping mouse comes after a settlement was reached with WildEarth Guardians in 2011.
‘The job of the Forest Service is to balance uses for the greatest good for the greatest number of Americans, not to provide subsidized grazing to welfare ranchers,’ WildEarth Guardians posted on its Facebook page May 6.
Otero County resident Denise Lang said he hopes the feds win the dispute.
‘This is the U.S. Forest Service who is protecting the sustainability of our forest,’ Lang told commissioners at Monday’s meeting.
House, meanwhile, has not acted.
Instead, what’s being called a ‘facilitated discussion’ between the two sides has been scheduled for Friday at the U.S. Attorney’s office in Albuquerque to try to come to a compromise.
‘Hopefully we can get something resolved on Friday,’ said House.
‘This is part of a larger issue,’ Dunn said. ‘There’s a big, strong push, which comes from the White House, to push grazing and oil and gas uses off federal ground. This incident here is just another example.’
‘The Forest Service will continue to work to ensure all parties involved understand that the fence is fully compliant with state and federal law,’ the service said in a statement released earlier this week.
The Otero County flare-up comes a month after Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy squared off against officials at the Bureau of Land Management. Bundy, who has lost repeatedly in court, tends his cattle on federal land. After the BLM tried to round-up his cattle and sparked a protest, the BLM stopped the roundup and is considering what to do next.
In Utah, meanwhile, another protest has popped up over the use of ATVs on trails that go into Recapture Canyon in the southeastern part of the state that have deemed off-limits.
Reprinted with Permission from Watchdog.org.

[American Patriot]

Well, NOW we know why the USDA is asking for machine guns...

Diamond Bar Ranch in NM Seized by US Forest Service

May 15, 2014

tags: America, BLM, Corruption, government control, government land grab, politics, U.S. Forest Service, USDA


In my previous post I linked to a piece over at LadyRaven’s blog about how the USDA is soliciting for “submachine guns, .40 Cal. S&W…” Now we can wonder why Department of Agriculture would be “required” to purchase such weapons? To my knowledge the U.S. Forest Service and the BLM are a part of the USDA. I think the USDA is in charge of these agencies. The following might give us one reason why the USDA believes it needs these weapons.
A lot of folks remember the standoff between the Bundy family and the BLM. Well, it seems the U.S. Forest Service is picking up where the BLM left off…

Officials say that the Laney’s can redeem their 80 cattle for $40,950
Via: Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children
Diamond Bar Ranch in NM Seized by US Forest Service

Southwest New Mexico – The Diamond Bar Ranch was acquired by the Laney family in 1986, and its adjacent Laney Cattle Company was allowed to utilize grazing lands since 1883. According to the US Forest Service, however, they are no longer entitled to do so, and the USFS has posted notices along the fence line of their property advising people not to attempt to enter the ranch. Lands are being seized, and the cattle removed, “one way or the other.”
Now they say that the cattle may be redeemed if the Laney’s pay for the costs of rounding up the 80 head of cattle… a hefty $40,950.
Reductions in the herds, loss of appeals, a hard life all because of a fish
Originally, the Laney property was just 115 acres surrounded by around 144,000 acres of public lands for which Mr. Laney paid grazing rights. But after a “study” by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decided that the lands could not sustain his 1,188 head of cattle, the Forest Service reduced his cattle herd to a meager 300 head.
Kit’s fight for the land and the ranching lifestyle cost him dearly over the years, even to the point of a divorce, as both Kit and Sherry grew exhausted from the battle. They were barred from improvements on the “wilderness” land for several years, which required them to ride out to livestock on horseback rather than hop in a truck. That and the continual stress of appeals, took a toll, though they eventually reconciled.

MORE RIGHT HERE

[vector7]

Dept of Agriculture Orders Submachine Guns with 30 Round Magazines

---

Print article Send a Tip

by AWR Hawkins 15 May 2014, 2:10 AM PDT post a comment

A May 7th solicitation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture seeks "the commercial acquisition of submachine guns [in] .40 Cal. S&W."

According to the solicitation, the Dept. of Agriculture wants the guns to have an "ambidextrous safety, semiautomatic or 2 round [bursts] trigger group, Tritium night sights front and rear, rails for attachment of flashlight (front under fore group) and scope (top rear), stock collapsible or folding," and a "30 rd. capacity" magazine.

They also want the submachine guns to have a "sling," be "lightweight," and have an "oversized trigger guard for gloved operation."

The solicitation directs "all responsible and/or interested sources...[to] submit their company name, point of contact, and telephone." Companies that submit information in a "timely" fashion "shall be considered by the agency for contact to determine weapon suitability."

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

[American Patriot]

New Mexico Opens Up Federal Land Against Will of Federal Forest Service

16 Friday May 2014


Posted by Mary W. in Agriculture, BLM, Political Parties, Sagebrush Rebellion, Tyrannical Government, United States, Water

≈ Leave a comment

Tags


Bundy Ranch, Bureaucrats, Cliven Bundy, Government Control, law enforcement, New Mexico, water



Looks like the Bundy-effect is spreading faster than MERS.


Let freedom ring… let the Feds sulk!


From the Washington Times: “State officials slap feds: New Mexico board orders Forest Service fence opened.”


A New Mexico county board on Monday instructed the local sheriff to open the Forest Service gates blocking thirsty cattle from reaching water, setting up a clash with federal agents over state water rights and endangered species.


The Otero County Commission voted 2-0, with one commissioner absent, to “immediately take steps to remove or open gates that are unlawfully denying citizens access to their private property rights.”


Commissioner Ronny Rardin said Monday he was uncomfortable with taking action “against people that are my friends,” apparently referring to local Forest Service rangers, but that he had an obligation as an elected commissioner to uphold the Constitution.


“That Constitution is in breach right now and it is our duty, it’s our civil duty — if we want to keep our nation free and keep our country as it was intended to be by our forefathers — to stand up and take this type of action,” said Mr. Rardin.


The tension comes as ranchers and others throughout the West cry foul over what they describe as the federal government’s tightening control of public lands. About 52 percent of Western land is owned by the federal government.


Read more at Political Outcast

[American Patriot]

Utah Congressman Set to Propose Funds Cut for Paramilitary Units at BLM, IRS and Other Fed Regulator

Tweet ? | (7) Comments | Subscribe | Back to full Article | Contact Us

By Jerry McConnell Thursday, May 15, 2014 I, and I’m certain many of my readers will agree when I say, “Kudos” to Cheryl K. Chumley and her employer, the Washington Times, for covering the story concerning the Utah Congressman, Chris Stewart, who, accordingly, “is mulling a measure to cut funding for any ‘paramilitary units’ that work for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and other federal regulatory agencies.” “There are lots of people who are really concerned when the BLM shows up with its own SWAT team,” Congressman Stewart said, the Salt Lake Tribune reported. “They’re regulatory agencies. They’re not paramilitary units, and I think that concerns a lot of us.” Kudos also to you Congressman, and, yes, it does concern a lot of others, many of whom I have talked with, and rightfully so in view of the recent happenings and suspicions of motives that the current Obama Administration have been unusually active in concerning probable attempts to purchase for government use millions upon millions of rounds of ammunition for handheld weapons without satisfactory explanation. In Cheryl Chumley’s April 30, 2014 WATimes article, “Utah lawmaker moves to disarm BLM, IRS, says, ‘They’re not paramilitary units’ ” and goes on to say, “His mulled amendment to an appropriations bill comes in context of recent BLM actions against Mr. Bundy: The federal agents armed themselves and surrounded his property, tasered his son, closed down road access to the ranch and even shot a couple of his prize bulls. The reasons? Mr. Bundy hadn’t paid his grazing fees to the federal government, but rather fought the matter in court.” I don’t care how much Mr. Bundy owes for grazing fees, I can’t sanction the tasering of ANY human and acting more like Hitler’s Germany-like Gestapo forces while shutting down public access to the ranch and shooting prize bulls of the alleged debtor to the U. S. government. Those are strong-armed bully tactics employed by criminals but not called for by mere regulators. What in God’s name was in the mind of the BLM Director or Head Person, Neil Kornze, former employee and old friend of U. S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid? Was this foray onto the Bundy property a prelude to driving the owner to abandon his land so Dirty Harry Reid could sell a chunk of it for in excess of five billion dollars to China? Reid’s son, who was to broker the sale to China was destined to be enriched by this rotten smelling communist deal cooked up by the crooked Majority Leader, Dirty Harry Reid. Well, to go on with the story, that Ms. Chumley was providing through the Washington Times, “Militia from all over the nation came to the ranch to support Mr. Bundy in his standoff with the BLM - and for that, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid labeled them ‘domestic terrorists,’ various media reported.” How does that make you feel about one of the leading politicians in our country acting like a hooligan brawler from a back alley, trampling on the U. S. Constitution’s Second Amendment rights to carry a weapon and this group was a form of militia about which the Second Amendment is enacted by specific name. Our Majority Leader, Harry Reid, objected to their presence so grievously that he labeled them “domestic terrorists” people who never fired a shot nor trespassed on property. The BLM was the more “domestic terrorists” as witnessed to their actions on the Bundy property. Ms. Chumley continued her article, “The BLM finally backed off and left - but not before a shocked nation expressed outrage at the government’s armed stance against a man who, at the root, was guilty of not paying a bill.” That may or may not have been the alleged reason for the BLM’s cruel and unusual treatment of the peaceful militia members there to see that no harm came to Mr. Bundy, but no proof has yet been offered; and it is such a lame and pitiful argument to justify the horrible actions of BLM Head Neil Kornze’s shock troops fully armed for combat instead of being there merely in their regulatory roles. It was more obvious to all that the government’s forces were about to prove that the Obama Administration was showing off its new enforcement view to any and all who would oppose the Obama regime of para-dictator the methods of assuring obedience to orders. Hitler demonstrated such actions brutally before and during World War II and now our very own dictator has armed his government militia to the teeth in a showcase of enforcement. In summation, Ms. Chumley wrote, “(Congressman) Mr. Stewart said ‘it’s high time the government end its practice of arming its own special units for various agencies, like the BLM and the IRS. ‘They should do what anyone else would do,’ he told the Salt Lake Tribune. ‘Call the local sheriff, who has the capability to intervene in situations like that.’ “The Interior Department, for its part, said the BLM and National Park Service had armed agents at Mr. Bundy’s ranch to guarantee the safety of the public and of their workers.” And, as Congressman Stewart so correctly assumed, that was why the Sheriff should have been called.

Jerry McConnell Bio

Jerry McConnell Most recent columns Jerry McConnell is a longtime resident of planet earth with one half century on the seacoast of NH. He is a community activist but promises not to run for President and he feeds ACORN’s to the squirrels. He can be emailed at lethrneck@comcast.net with complaints or the editor at letters@canadafreepress.com with favorables.

[American Patriot]

BLM Doubles Down on Texas Land: It’s Ours for ‘Planning’

June 25, 2014

tags: BLM, bureau of land management

Bob Price

6/24/2014

Source …..

U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Director Neil Kornze responded to the April letters from Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott (R) and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) about the Red River land dispute between the federal government and the State of Texas. The letter comes approximately two months after the initial requests from Abbott and Cruz were submitted to the director and largely doubles down on broad claims of federal ownership.
On April 22, Breitbart Texas, in an exclusive interview with Gen. Abbott, revealed the letter sent to Director Kornze requesting clarification about the BLM’s position about the disputed land ownership along the Red River north of Wichita Falls, Texas.
In the letter, Gen. Abbott details five issues for the BLM to address:

1. Please delineate with specificity each of the steps for the RMP/EIS process for property along the Red River.
2. Please describe the procedural due process the BLM will afford to Texans whose property may be claimed by the federal government.
3. Please confirm whether the BLM agrees that, from 1923 until the ratification of the Red River Boundary Compact, the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma was the gradient line of the south bank of the Red River. To the extent the BLM does not agree, please provide legal analysis supporting the BLM’s position.
4. Please confirm whether the BLM still considers Congress’ ratification of the Red River Boundary Compact as determinative of its interest in land along the Red River? To the extent the BLM does not agree, please provide legal analysis supporting the BLM’s new position.
5. Please delineate with specificity the amount of Texas territory that would be impacted by the BLM’s decision to claim this private land as the property of the federal government.

Senator Cruz, in his letter to Kornze, reiterated Abbott’s points from his letter and added his own inquiry:
“Please confirm that BLM does not take the position that it has rights to ownership or control of any of the 90,000 acres of land along the Red River that are at the center of this controversy or similarly situated land. If it claims any such rights, please identify with specificity the acreage, location and legal basis for claiming those rights.”
Kornze narrows down Abbott’s letter to two issues. “(I) the Resource Management Plan/Environmental lmpact Statement process, and (2) ownership interests of the United States and adjacent landowners in the area. I appreciate the opportunity to offer clarification.”
Kornze’s letter explains the BLM’s procedures for developing its new Resource Management Planning (RMP) process. To summarize, the RMP/EIS process is designed to establish general management goals, objectives, and directives for public resources,” Kornze begins in the letter, “including lands and minerals, managed by the BLM. The process involves numerous steps that allow for public input, analysis, and informed decision-making with regard to public resources.”
“In order to ensure the appropriate consistency with other governmental planning efforts,” Kornze explained, “the BLM invited local, state, Federal, and tribal representatives to participate as cooperating agencies in the preparation of the BLM’s RMP/EIS.”
As to the assertion of ownership of the disputed land along the Red River, Director Kornze appears to be standing with the position that the BLM has always owned this land. “According to the plain terms of Article VII,” Kornze states in the letter, “the Compact ‘does not change: ( I) the title of any person or entity, public or private, to any of the lands adjacent to the Red River; (2) the rights, including riparian rights, of any person or entity, public or private, that exist as a result of the person’ s or entity’s title to lands adjacent to the Red River; or (3) the boundaries of those lands.’ Therefore, any shifts in the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma as a result of the Compact may mean that public lands that are owned by the United States now are within Texas that were formerly in Oklahoma.”
Kornze concluded, “The BLM will determine the uses and extent of these public lands through the current public planning process and any necessary surveys.”
Gen. Abbott told Breitbart Texas, “The BLM’s recent letter fails to answer the questions that I and many Texans have about the BLM’s seeming land grab along the Red River. It is still unclear what area along the Red River the BLM is attempting to lay claim to, under what authority, and how the BLM intends to treat the Texans who have for generations considered the land private property. The BLM’s inadequate response will force Texas to pursue other options to obtain the needed information — including litigation if needed.”

[American Patriot]

Sheriff: Cliven Bundy should be held accountable for crossing the line

06 Sunday Jul 2014
Posted by Mary W. in BLM, Dictatorial Government, FBI, Police State, Sagebrush Rebellion, US Constitution, US News
≈ 1 Comment

Tags
armed protestoers, BLM, Bundy Ranch Standoff, Bunkerville Nevada, Cattle, cattle ranch, federal agency, federal court order, federal grazing fees, militia members, Nevada Sheriff, no charges filed, Rancher Cliven Bundy, Ranchers, Roundup

Rancher Cliven Bundy must be held accountable, Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie said Thursday.
But, the sheriff added, the federal agency trying to do it must reconsider its methods in order to prevent the bloodshed that was so narrowly avoided in April.
Gillespie, speaking to a Review-Journal editorial board, minced no words when recounting the mistakes made in the days and weeks before an April 12 standoff between armed protesters and the Bureau of Land Management on Bundy’s Bunkerville cattle ranch, about 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas.
The sheriff harshly criticized Bundy and said his family committed “serious errors” when BLM officers tried to round up more than 500 of the rancher’s cattle. Bundy, who believes the public land is his to use, hasn’t paid his federal grazing fees for 20 years and ignored a federal court order to remove the cattle.
Gillespie said he spoke to Bundy many times in the months before the roundup. He said he made it clear to Bundy that, if his family was going to protest, it must be peaceful.
But Bundy crossed the line when he allowed his supporters, many of whom were armed militia members, onto his property to aim guns at police, the sheriff said.
“If you step over that line, there are consequences to those actions. And I believe they stepped over that line. No doubt about it,” Gillespie said. “They need to be held accountable for it.”
No charges have been filed, but the FBI continues to investigate.
Gillespie said the BLM deserves blame for escalating the situation, ignoring his advice, dismissing his warnings and even lying about their operation.
He asked BLM officials to have town hall meetings regarding the roundup, but those never happened. And although officials told him they had a place to move Bundy’s cattle, Gillespie later discovered that wasn’t true.
“There was no place to take them to,” he said.
After a confrontational meeting with Bundy’s children a few weeks before the roundup, Gillespie said he was concerned. When family is involved, emotions can boil over.
“I came back from that saying, ‘This is not the time to do this,’” he said. “They said, ‘We do this all the time. We know what we’re doing. We hear what you’re saying, but we’re moving forward.’ ”
But early in the BLM operation, after a video of Bundy’s son being stunned with a Taser went viral on the Internet, militia members and other protesters flocked to the ranch. Gillespie said the BLM underestimated the pushback.
Bundy wasn’t a hardened criminal, Gillespie said; he was a rancher who stopped paying his fees, and that’s not worth risking violence.
“You’ll have a hard time convincing me that one person’s drop of blood is worth any one of those cows,” he said.
Gillespie said he was proud of his officers for de-escalating the situation, but that didn’t stop Bundy from later criticizing Gillespie for not disarming and removing the federal officers from his land.
Metro would be struck by tragedy just two months later, when two officers were ambushed and executed by Jerad and Amanda Miller, a married couple that had visited Bundy’s ranch.
But Gillespie said he doesn’t believe Bundy’s vitriol toward him inspired the couple to attack officers.
“I can’t totally discount that, but today, based on what I know, do I believe that was a reason the Millers did what they did?” he asked. “No. I don’t believe that to be the case.”
Read more at Las Vegas Review-Journal

[Ryan Ruck]

Gillespie said he spoke to Bundy many times in the months before the roundup. He said he made it clear to Bundy that, if his family was going to protest, it must be peaceful.

I didn't see any incident during that event where the supporters breached the peace.

But Bundy crossed the line when he allowed his supporters, many of whom were armed militia members, onto his property to aim guns at police, the sheriff said.

1) Armed ≠ not peaceful
2) I have yet to see definitive proof anyone aimed a gun directly at any LEO

“You’ll have a hard time convincing me that one person’s drop of blood is worth any one of those cows,” he said.

Since we just got done celebrating it, I would hope the sheriff is familiar with "Life, Liberty, and Property".

The people that founded this nation felt that a measly 3% tax on tea was enough to shed blood.

[Malsua]

I agree, a head of cattle isn't worth a person's blood.

The cattle are simply a proxy in the government's war on freedom and the American people however.

[American Patriot]

Posted July 24, 2014 - 4:09pmUpdated July 24, 2014 - 6:16pmLawmaker says BLM was ‘completely insane’ on Bundy standoff

Elko County Commissioner Grant Gerber testifies Thursday before the House public lands and environmental regulation subcommittee in Washington, D.C. Gerber, along with a county commissioner and sheriff from Garfield County, Utah, told lawmakers about local conflicts with agents from the BLM. (Steve Tetreault/Stephens Washington Bureau)

image


By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU



WASHINGTON – Republican lawmakers on Thursday criticized the Bureau of Land Management’s handling of the April standoff with Clark County rancher Cliven Bundy, saying tensions could have been eased by local authorities rather than the BLM’s use of heavily armed agents.


“Whether Bundy was right or wrong, was the BLM’s response reasonable? Anyone watching that unfolding fiasco can answer it was completely insane,” said Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., who added that guns should be taken out of the hands of federal land managers.


Rep. Chris Stewart, R-Utah, said photos of combat-uniformed and heavily armed agents crouched behind utility vehicles looked like they were taken in Afghanistan or Iraq rather than the American West. He said it was part of a troubling pattern of non-law enforcement agencies having SWAT-like units armed like “the tip of the spear.”


“I have observed more and more the level of militarization occurring within many federal agencies, and I mean almost every federal agency,” Stewart said. “I’m not sure having these teams scattered across dozens of agencies is the most efficient use of resources. It’s heavy-handed and intimidating to the American people.”


Perhaps inevitably, a hearing of the House public lands subcommittee about tensions between the BLM and local counties turned to a debate on the Bundy operation. A BLM roundup seeking to enforce a court order and remove the rancher’s cattle from public land for nonpayment of fees turned into a tense standoff with armed Bundy supporters. The roundup ultimately was abandoned.


McClintock said the BLM should have turned the matter over to the county sheriff, Doug Gillespie. Gillespie himself has been critical of the BLM’s operation.


“Local law enforcement knew the circumstances, knew the people involved and would exercise much better judgment nine times out of 10,” McClintock said. “So I ask once again, why are we arming land managers?”


James Perkins, a Utah county sheriff at the hearing, told McClintock he was “absolutely 100 percent right. If that had been turned over to the county, we wouldn’t even be talking about it today.”


At the hearing, officials from Elko County in Nevada and Garfield County in Utah said the BLM’s handling of the roundup was symptomatic of deteriorating relations between locals and land managers who they described as imperious and abusive.


“There have been so many bridges burned I don’t know if they can be repaired,” said Perkins, sheriff of Garfield County, where the relationship has become so strained the county passed a resolution withdrawing recognition of federal authority.


Elko County Commissioner Grant Gerber came armed with a series of complaints against the BLM manager of the Battle Mountain District, whom he said threatens and bullies ranchers by cutting back on their grazing rights and acted in an intimidating manner when confronted with a petition that he be removed.


“And the BLM is very reluctant to investigate stories of abuse,” Gerber said.


Rep. Raul Grijalva of Arizona, the only Democrat to participate in the hearing, called it “an echo chamber of complaints.” He said it was difficult to determine the truth because the BLM was not invited to testify and defend itself.


Grijalva said, for instance, there were two sides to the Bundy roundup story.


“We saw some isolated pictures of heavy-handed law enforcement, but there were also very graphic pictures of militia folks supporting Bundy on the highway, pointing weapons at U.S. marshals,” he said. “If that’s the level of rhetoric … I think both sides should be very cautious.”


In a statement, BLM spokesman Jeff Krauss said the agency “disagrees with the many vague and inaccurate claims that were made at today’s hearing regarding the BLM’s collaboration with local entities. Cooperation with all stakeholders is critical to carrying out the BLM’s mission and finding common ground in balancing the many uses of the public lands.”


Contact Steve Tetreault at stetreault@stephensmedia.com or 202-783-1760. Find him on Twitter: @STetreaultDC.

[vector7]

FBI confirms activity in west Las Vegas Valley neighborhood (Nevada Qathkeeper arrested)

http://www.fox5vegas.com/ ^ | march 24, 2015 | matt guillermo
Posted on 4/3/2015, 7:27:24 AM by lowbridge


A spokesperson with the FBI confirmed the agency was performing a "law enforcement action" in a west Las Vegas Valley neighborhood.


The action was first reported Tuesday morning in the area of Arroyo Avenue and Cedarspring Drive, near Rainbow Boulevard and West Tropicana Avenue.


An FBI representative did not immediately elaborate on the context of the activity.


(Excerpt) Read more at fox5vegas.com ...

[American Patriot]

Wonder who?

[vector7]

4,000 Native Americans in Bundy Ranch-Style Protest as DHS Cuts Water Supply — Media Blackout

Posted on August 24, 2016 by David Robinson



Cannon Ball, ND — (Common Dreams) Growing in number and spirit, the Standing Rock Sioux protest against the Dakota Access Pipeline is swiftly gaining strength ahead of a federal hearing on the controversial project. Support has spread across the country, and thousands have descended on the peaceful “prayer camps” in recent days, prompting state officials on Monday to remove the demonstrators’ drinking water supply.

North Dakota homeland security director Greg Wilz ordered the removal of state-owned trailers and water tanks from the protest encampment, despite the sweltering heat, because of alleged disorderly conduct, according to the Bismarck Tribune, including reports of laser pointers aimed at surveillance aircraft.

“People are getting overheated now already,” said Johnelle Leingang, the tribe’s emergency response coordinator, as temperatures hovered around 90º F on Monday. “It’s very hurtful.”

Tribal activists say the state’s response, which includes surveillance, road blockades with military checkpoints, and a state of emergency declaration, has been overly aggressive and manipulative.

“It is deeply ironic that the Governor would release emergency funds under the guise of public health and safety, but then remove the infrastructure that helps ensure health and safety in the camp,” said Tara Houska, national campaigns director for Honor the Earth.

The supplies were provided last week by the North Dakota Department of Health at the tribe’s request to support the roughly 2,500 people now gathered along the Standing Rock reservation’s border on the Cannonball River, near where the pipeline is slated to cross.

LaDonna Allard, director of one of the prayer camps, said, “The gathering here remains 100 percent peaceful and ceremonial, as it has from day one. We are standing together in prayer…Why is a gathering of Indians so inherently threatening and frightening to some people?”

“This is nothing but repression of our growing movement to protect our water and future generations,” Houska added.

Standing Rock spokesman Steven Sitting Bear said he’s received “notifications from tribes all over the country that have caravans in route, so it’s continuing to grow.”

On Wednesday, high profile activists and supporters are rallying in Washington D.C. outside the U.S. District Court, where members of the Standing Rock Sioux will argue that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers granted Energy Transfer Corporation approval for the 1,172-mile pipeline without tribal consent.

The tribe says that the pipeline—which will carry up to 570,000 barrels of fracked Bakken oil daily across four states to a market hub in Illinois—puts the sacred waters of the Missouri River at great risk.

Climate campaigner and 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben penned an op-ed on Monday offering a vision of “what it might mean if the if the Army Corps, or the Obama administration, simply said: ‘You know what, you’re right. We don’t need to build this pipeline.’”

“It would mean that after 525 years, someone had actually paid attention to the good sense that Native Americans have been offering almost from the start,” he continues:

One has the ominous sense of grim history about to be reenacted at Standing Rock. North Dakota authorities—who are in essence a subsidiary of the fossil fuel industry—have insisted that the Sioux are violent, that they have “pipe bombs.” There are rumors about calling in the National Guard. The possibility for renewed tragedy is very real.

But the possibility for a new outcome is there as well. The Army Corps of Engineers might back off. The president might decide, as he did with Keystone, that this pipeline would “exacerbate” climate change and hence should be reviewed more carefully. We might, after five centuries, actually listen to the only people who’ve ever successfully inhabited this continent for the long term.

Construction on the pipeline remains halted after developers paused the project last week in anticipation of the Wednesday hearing.

Meanwhile, a U.S. District Court hearing on whether a preliminary injunction should be issued against the protesters has been rescheduled from Thursday to Sept. 8, although a restraining order against the demonstrators has also been extended until then. Filing the order on Monday, U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland wrote that factions are ‘”strongly encouraged to meet and confer in good faith’ to try and resolve the dispute out of court,” the Tribune reported.

[Ryan Ruck]

FBI Posed As Documentary Filmmakers To Conduct Interviews With Bundy Ranch Supporters

March 24, 2017

Undercover FBI agents disguised as documentary filmmakers were deployed to the Nevada desert in 2014 to speak with supporters of rancher Cliven Bundy amid an armed standoff with the federal government, an agent testified this week.

Testifying on behalf of the government in its case against two of those supporters, FBI Special Agent Charles Johnson told jurors Wednesday how the bureau used a bogus film crew to gather statements during the standoff, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported.

Footage from the purported film, “America Reloaded,” was played in court as jurors prepared to decide the fate of Scott Drexler and Eric Parker — two of six defendants accused of conspiring to keep the U.S. Bureau of Land Management from impounding Mr. Bundy’s cattle during the widely reported 2014 row between federal BLM agents and the rancher and his supporters.

Mr. Drexler told the supposed filmmakers that he had traveled from Idaho to the Bunkerville ranch upon reading about protests being waged against the BLM after its agents tried to seize cattle from Mr. Bundy following a lengthy legal dispute.

“What I was looking for was just a show of support … it seems as if when there are armed people around a situation, then the authorities have to be a little more civil, have to treat you like a person,” he said on camera. “If nobody is facing any kind of consequences for their actions, they can just do whatever they want.”

The objective of individuals who assembled on Mr. Bundy’s behalf “was just a show of force,” Mr. Drexler told the interviewers, the newspaper reported.

Mr. Parker, meanwhile, said his own involvement stemmed from his desire “to stand for the Constitution.”

“I don’t think you have to be in the militia for that,” Mr. Parker said on the video. “The goal was peaceful end.”

Nonetheless, jurors were showed footage in which Mr. Parker demonstrated precisely how he planned to use his rifle to get a clear vantage point in the event the standoff turned violent.

“If they started shooting at people in the crowd, I would have been able to lay down cover fire,” Mr. Parker said on tape.

Prosecutors have charged six men in all with charges stemming from the standoff, including conspiracy, firearm offenses and assault on a federal officer, including Mr. Bundy and two of his sons, Ryan and Ammon.

Dan Hill, Ammon Bundy’s defense attorney, previously took aim over the FBI’s use of a bogus film crew when details about the practice emerged in earlier court filings, and said then that it was “troublesome that the FBI would sink to that tactic.”

[Ryan Ruck]

Breaking news!

Charges Against Rancher Cliven Bundy, Three Others Are Dismissed

January 8, 2018

A federal judge dismissed all charges against Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, his two sons and another man on Monday after accusing prosecutors of willfully withholding evidence from Bundy’s lawyers.

U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro cited "flagrant prosecutorial misconduct" in her decision to dismiss all charges against the Nevada rancher and three others.

"The court finds that the universal sense of justice has been violated," Navarro said.

Bundy's supporters cheered as he walked out of court a free man, hugging his wife. He said he'd been jailed for 700 days as a "political prisoner" for refusing to acknowledge federal authority over the land around his cattle ranch.

On Dec. 20, Navarro declared a mistrial in the high-profile Bundy case. It was only the latest, stunning development in the saga of the Nevada rancher, who led a tense, armed standoff with federal officials trying to take over his land. The clash served as a public repudiation of the federal government.

The Brady rule, named after the landmark 1963 Supreme Court case known as Brady vs. Maryland, holds that failure to disclose such evidence violates a defendant’s right to due process.

“In this case the failures to comply with Brady were exquisite, extraordinary,” said Fox News legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano. “The judge exercised tremendous patience.”

The 71-year-old Bundy’s battle with the federal government eventually led to what became known as the Bundy standoff of 2014. But it began long before that.

In the early 1990s, the U.S. government limited grazing rights on federal lands in order to protect the desert tortoise habitat. In 1993, Bundy, in protest, refused to renew his permit for cattle grazing, and continued grazing his livestock on these public lands. He didn’t recognize the authority of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over the sovereign state of Nevada.

The federal courts sided with the BLM, and Bundy didn’t seem to have a legal leg to stand on. Nevertheless, the rancher and the government continued this dispute for 20 years, and Bundy ended up owing over $1 million in fees and fines.

Things came to a head in 2014, when officials planned to capture and impound cattle trespassing on government land. Protesters, many armed, tried to block the authorities, which led to a standoff. For a time, they even shut down a portion of I-15, the main interstate highway running through Southern Nevada.

Tensions escalated until officials, fearing for the general safety, announced they would return Bundy’s cattle and suspend the roundup.

Afterward, Bundy continued to graze his cattle and not pay fees. He and his fellow protesters were heroes to some, but criminals to the federal government. Bundy, along with others seen as leaders of the standoff, including sons Ammon and Ryan and militia member Ryan Payne, were charged with numerous felonies, including conspiracy, assault on a federal officer and using a firearm in a violent crime. They faced many years in prison.

The Bundy case finally went to trial last October. But just two months later, it ended with Navarro angry, the feds humiliated and Bundy – at least to his supporters – vindicated.

Navarro had suspended the trial earlier and warned of a mistrial when prosecutors released information after a discovery deadline. Overall, the government was late in handing over more than 3,300 pages of documents. Further, some defense requests for information that ultimately came to light had been ridiculed by prosecutors as “fantastical” and a “fishing expedition.”

“Either the government lied or [its actions were] so grossly negligent as to be tantamount to lying,” Napolitano said. “This happened over and over again.”

Navarro said Monday it was clear the FBI was involved in the prosecution and it was not a coincidence that most of the evidence that was held back – which would have worked in Bundy’s favor – came from the FBI, AZCentral reported.

The newspaper said after the courtroom doors opened following Navarro’s ruling, a huge cheer went up from a crowd of spectators that had gathered outside.

[Malsua]

It just goes to show that when democrats are in power, they will run roughshod over anyone who gets in front of their agenda. I'm quite sure this story caught the attention of higher ups in the current administration and word was handed down to knock off the bullshit.