Bundy Women Pull Together As Defense Teams Press For Family Members’ Pre-Trial Release

BUNKERVILLE, Nev., May 15, 2016 (Gephardt Daily) — It’s been more than two years since Nevada cattle rancher Cliven Bundy — along with his sons and hundreds of supporters — made headlines in their resistance of heavily armed Federal agents as they attempted to seize the family’s cattle in a dispute over grazing fees with the BLM.

On Saturday, with 70-year-old Cliven Bundy in solitary confinement and four sons behind bars facing years in Federal prison — Cliven’s wife, Carole Bundy, along with a group simply known along the Arizona Strip as The Bundy Women, gathered at the site of the standoff as they prepare to do battle with the government yet again.

Photo: Gephardt Daily
Defense lawyers for jailed Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy meet with his wife, Carol Bundy, and other family members outside Bunkerville, Nevada Saturday, May 14, 2016. Photo: Gephardt Daily

Only this time around there were no militia members — just a small army of defense attorneys and their private investigators who had come to survey the site of the 2014 standoff.

One of The Bundy Women — MaryLynn Bundy, wife of Cliven’s son Dave Bundy, will spend Monday in a Nevada courtroom, where she’ll learn whether her husband will be released from custody pending trial on conspiracy and other charges related to the Bunkerville standoff.

“I’m really hoping something will touch the judge and the judge will do what is right, and let him come home,” MaryLynn Bundy told Gephardt Daily.

Dave and MaryLynn Bundy have lived in Delta, Utah for the past three years.

He was taken into custody March 3, 2016 shortly after his brothers Ammon and Lyle here arrested for their roles in the armed takeover of the Malheur Wildlife Refuges outside Burns, Oregon.

As many as 20 law enforcement agents took part in the Utah arrest, which went down at a construction site where Bundy and his wife are building a house.

Photo: Gephardt Daily
Carol Bundy, wife of jailed Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, talks about the mounting hardships facing her family in the wake of her husband’s arrest on charges stemming from the 2014 standoff against the BLM and Federal law enforcement officers. Photo: Gephardt Daily

Now, money saved to build the family’s new home is being spent on legal fees.

MaryLynn says the situation is taking not only taking a toll on the family finances, but emotionally as well. Her three boys and three girls, those who are old enough to talk, keep asking when their dad will be home.

“I don’t have an answer for them,” she said, struggling to keep her composure. “I’m not going to tell them when he’ll be home because I don’t know. And that’s hard.”

Dave Bundy was originally arrested in 2014 after clashing with BLM officers during the standoff. His extended family told attorneys on on Saturday Dave had been thrown to  the ground and kicked repeatedly before being handcuffed and led away.

Supporters also claim Dave was unarmed during the standoff and ultimately played the role of peacemaker in bringing the conflict to an end.

Prosecutors however paint an altogether different picture. During a March 2016 detention hearing in Salt Lake City, Andrew Choate, assistant U.S. Attorney, said the peacemaker claims are a farce. 

“The government believes that’s the furthest thing from the truth,” Choate told a federal judge. “They will tell you that after the events had taken place, after the BLM had stood down, there was one person on the whole Bundy side, on the entire armed resistance side that allowed the federal law enforcement agencies to exit the wash with their lives, it was Dave Bundy. We’ll admit that. But it’s too little too late. What he did actually shows that he does have power and authority over his entire group.”

The decision on whether Dave Bundy will be freed pending trial will be made at 2 p.m. Monday.

Dave Bundy’s attorney, Cal J. Potter, sees his client’s defense as a First Amendment case.

“You have a ranching family that’s been here for over 100 years, so you have a situation where they were trying to do to what they believe was right, exercising their First Amendment rights,” Potter said.

“(It was) clearly threatening, using deadly force on members of the family. The mothers had their children there, so it’s a situation where you see first hand the brutality to the cattle.”

The Cliven Bundy Ranch outside Bunkerville, Nevada. Photo: Gephardt Daily
The Cliven Bundy Ranch outside Bunkerville, Nevada, May 14, 2016. Photo: Gephardt Daily

Potter said that when Federal officers arrived with heavy armament and snipers to take the Bundys’ cattle, “It was an overreaction.

“I mean, all these things, you wouldn’t believe happen in America, and particularly here in Clark County, Nevada.”

Potter also hopes Dave Bundy’s case will be helped by letters attesting to his character, provided by local officials.

MaryLynn Bundy said she tries to help her children understand why their father is in jail.

“We’re here in this country that they put away a man who is innocent, and he didn’t do anything wrong. And that’s really hard for them to understand.”

“I let them know that he (Dave) has several chances that the judge will do what’s right and they will let our dad come home,” she said.

The two 20-minute visits the family is allowed per week, to talk to Dave over a video system, never seem like enough, MaryLynn said.

“I have six kids so I have to split the time, and it’s hard for them to say goodbye,” she said. “When I say, ‘Your 5 minutes is up,’ they really just cant believe it, like, ‘No, that wasn’t enough time and I didn’t get to say goodbye to him.'”

Bundy said she and her children pray each night that the judge will decide to release Dave while he awaits trial. Potter said if it doesn’t happen Monday, he will continue to file requests and appeals to the decision.

MaryLynn Bundy says her kids just want to know when Dad will be back, and life will be like it was.

“That’s a really good question,” she said. “I have no idea.”


    • Perhaps Marylynn Bundy should tell her children the truth, that their daddy committed a crime and now he like anyone else who commits a crime must be punished for it. What a great teaching moment she has been given.
      If the Bundy’s love their families so much why did they go to another state, leaving wives and children behind, to take over a refuge they planned to stay at for years.

      • Marylynn’s husband, Dave, was never in Oregon, never carried a firearm at the Bundy ranch, and was only there to help round up the cattle. He was at one point taking pictures of the BLM on a public road when they told him he could not do that, even though he was exercising his first amendment rights. They threw him to the ground, stepped on his head, and arrested him, only to release him, and now two years later they arrest him again.

      • Absolutely correct Lynell. Apparently big shooter William has difficulty following a story but can spew chit like an un-informed playground bully that he’s shown himself to be.

  1. The Bundy Family isn’t above the law. There were laws/regulations passed, they didn’t like them so they decided not to follow them starting back in the early 1990’s. They stopped paying fees to rent the land they used for grazing lifestock and declared the government invalid. They were taken to court and lost, so they declared the court invalid. They are told that their cattle are going to be rounded up by the Feds and they get a bunch of guns including automatic weapons and use women and children as shields and then declare the law enforcement officers that were following the court orders as the villiains. Now they are in jail and they are again crying foul. They are not above the law, but their words and actions indicate that they think they are. Being bullies with guns making threats because you dont like the rules and just like every other criminal, they all claim they are innocent. This isn’t the old Wild West and if everyone just did as they pleased and ignored laws/regulations or pulled guns making theats we would be in total chaos. If everyone declared law enforcement as the villiains and created their own ideas of law, then it would be just like the warlords in 3rd world countries. They need to stay in jail.

    • You have it totally wrong, completely distorted version of what happened. You, like a lot of duped and conned Americans think that the US government occupies the moral high ground, I mean, after all it is the USA and it simply can’t be wrong in your view. Dave Bundy was taking pictures from a public highway. The government thugs told him to stop. He refused. They threw him to the ground and kicked him. Your wonderful government set up a Free Speech Zone, where they told people they had to gather for their shouts of protest. If they went out of the free speech zone, they would get beat up like Dave Bundy. As the article points out, your wonderful government sent in snipers and heavily armed police to sieze their source of livelihood. They are the ones who should be in jail, not the Bundys.

    • Such a degree of presumed ignorance could only come from a government agent, who would post such nonsense. The imprisonment of the Bundys shows the lack of understanding of the US Constitution and this comment demonstrates that same lack of understanding – an unwillingness to recognize the US Constitution. It’s the US government that is acting as if written law does not exist and it can do as it pleases to forward a dictatorship. Reference: US Constitution, Article I, Section 8, Clause 17.

      • The “presumed ignorance” is completely on your part. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution sets out the conditions for the establishment of the seat of government, what eventually became the District of Columbia, and nothing more. It is not, in any way, a restriction on the powers of the federal government to own land. Numerous Supreme Court decisions and numerous passages of the Federalist Papers confirm this fact. You, like the Bundys, have cherry picked clause 17 from this section and have grossly misinterpreted it. Nothing in history or the law supports your ignorance.

      • The U.S. Supreme Court has described this power as “without limitation,” stating that:

        while Congress can acquire exclusive or partial jurisdiction over lands within a
        State by the State’s consent or cession, the presence or absence of such
        jurisdiction has nothing to do with Congress’ powers under the Property Clause.
        Absent consent or cession a State undoubtedly retains jurisdiction over federal
        lands within its territory, but Congress equally surely retains the power to enact
        legislation respecting those lands pursuant to the Property Clause…. And when
        Congress so acts, the federal legislation necessarily overrides conflicting state
        laws under the Supremacy Clause.

      • The U.S. Supreme Court has
        described this power as “without limitation,” stating that:
        while Congress can acquire exclusive or partial jurisdiction over lands within a
        State by the State’s consent or cession, the presence or absence of such
        jurisdiction has nothing to do with Congress’ powers under the Property Clause.
        Absent consent or cession a State undoubtedly retains jurisdiction over federal
        lands within its territory, but Congress equally surely retains the power to enact
        legislation respecting those lands pursuant to the Property Clause…. And when
        Congress so acts, the federal legislation necessarily overrides conflicting state
        laws under the Supremacy Clause.

    • I live in Oregon and wholeheartedly agree! The Occupiers’ pretense that they are innocent of crime if they don’t believe in our laws — or that crimes committed while protesting are justified — is just plain nutty.

      Fact: Gun toting strangers (many with drug and criminal histories & some with mental health issues) responded to a Bundy call to arms and descended upon an Oregon community. Schools had to be closed for safety reasons. They made death threats to Oregon state officials and others.

      Fact: Although not Oregonians, the Bundy Gang assummed the right to take over land they claim belongs to Oregon. The community asked them to leave. The Sheriff asked them to leave. Oregon asked them to leave… And for 41 days, the group videotaped themselves destroying property that did not belong to them and stealing vehicles.

      Fact: A man died. It was videotaped from 3 angles. It shows a belligerent, disrespectful man yelling at our Oregon State Police, calling them ‘boys’ and repeatedly telling the police to shoot him. The man was (legitimately) being detained but he fled the roadblock, crashed his vehicle, and is seen reaching twice for his pocket that held a gun. To make matters worse, he did all this with a kid in the van.

      Fact: The amount of taxpayer $$ wasted on the Bundy’s shenanigans is a disgrace.

      The Bundy’s and their followers need to wake up and realize that there are repercussions and consequences to actions. They should be considered. I hope they learn something from this hurtful experience they created. But as they rewrite the narrative to make themselves into victims rather than perpetrators, I know they won’t. I can only hope they don’t cause more people to die.

      • You are 100% correct, Lynn. Excellent and perceptive summary and analysis. The Bundy Bunch is a criminal group of people who have a grossly mistaken opinion about what the U.S. Constitution says. Public land belongs to all of us and is best management by our Federal agencies, NOT the states and certainly not the commercial livestock industry. It is time to remove all cows and sheep from all public land, because the livestock operators have destroyed the biological integrity of our public land by overgrazing it so badly, that it won’t support their cows or sheep any longer. I hope the Bundy men in prison are kept there for a long, long time.

      • Exactly right, Lynn. Those people are secessionist welfare queens and should remain in custody until they get their day in court. When found guilty, the maximum plenalty is appropriate. Ther starving cattle illegally parked on our public lands are forefit and should be dispatched where they stand for scavengers to benifit from. The family ranch assets should be confiscated and sold to pay the outstanding debt to taxpayers.

    • this is not to trial yet. every day we hear of some rape, murder, child rape,ect. vicious crimes where they are no doubt guilty,but are released on bail or at least have bail set. the bundy family is no flight risk! they want their trial to prove jurisdiction. the government knows they will lose a fair trial on the issue, so they want to stress the bundy’s into a plea bargain. to hell with the judges who allow this abomination of law. who’s the victom?

      • Fact: in most states people accused of murder are not released because bail is set at 500k or more. Federal courts do not require bail but they do require a belief that the accused recognize the court’s authority and appear for trial and inot go to ground. That’s where the Bundy’s have issues. Cliven ignored previous court orders and called militia to prevent enforcement. Ammon led an armed occupation the Oregon refuge. If released, would the Bundy’s hunker down in Bunkerville call the militia to protect them?

      • Considering they claim to not recognize the authority of the federal government. Have already engaged in a armed standoff with that government when it attempted to enforce 2 legal court orders why should they now be allowed to go home?

        Why is it that the Bundy folks claim they are the only one’s with correct information. That everything that goes against their version of events must be false? Regardless of how true it actually is.
        They made the claim that Finicums truck was hit hundreds of times, it wasn’t. Ammon described the event he saw unfold in regards to the shooting of Finicum at the second roadblock.
        Problem is Ammo couldn’t see the other road block from his position at the first. Remember the feds planned it that way.

      • The Bundys are fond of armed standoffs. Cliven spent the last 2 years with bodyguards to keep him from being arrested. It would be lunacy to expect anything but another armed standoff if they were released. They do not recognize Federal jurisdiction, so they wouldn’t show up at trials. Those OTHER violent criminals you mention are unlikely to appeal to militias to help them out.

  2. I pray hard to my God daily that they keep these terrorist in prison for life…I do not want a revolution in my neighborhood…the feds need to track them all down and arrest them all before they kill again…just go to their facebook pages and you will see how much they want to KILL us all…Please feds DO YOUR job

      • The patriots helped kill Lavoy Finicum thru his, and their, dangerous criminal behavior. Guys, next time leave the guns at home.

        • Not only did they kill 2 Las Vegas police officers in cold blood, they were at lunch eating pizza when these 2 that the Bundy would call “patriots” walked up and just shot them. Going as far as placing a Gadsden flag over the bodies. They proceeded towards another store looking for more victims when they were confronted by a civilian who was trying to protect others. He was shot in the back by the female who was able to sneak up behind him.
          These are the type of people the Bundy’s surround them selves with.
          No where near as horrid but still needing to be pointed out are the numerous Bundy’s thugs who claim to have served in the military. Although they make that claim they never served a day. Included in this group of false soldiers and marines are several who are considered the Bundy body guards.
          Yep a fine group of upstanding citizens the Bundy’s and their gang are.

          • They are not anti-government; they are anti-corrupt government. Why the hell is our government going in with a small army to remove cattle, spending 4 million to remove them, when supposedly Cliven, so they say, owes 1 million. They have never presented him with a bill, and the majority of that is probably fines. Cliven also OWNS the water rights on that property. They are deeded with the state. They can be bought, sold, and inherited.

          • They went in with a small army because Cliven told them he and his cohorts would shoot to kill if they took his cattle. He said this for years before the standoff.

    • Not even the federal government killed anyone in the Bunkerville standoff. It was only in the Malheur Standoff this last January that anyone was killed. Back then, Mr Holloway, can you recall who did the killing?

  3. They government isnt above the law. If you want to take away what country people have where would they go? Would you all have them killed? Label them terrorists for trying to water the cattle? Dont be crying when food doesnt come into the city. It was you who went along with govt doing this. Guess it would be more shockong if they showed up to nicholas cage , johntravolta and al sharptons house with snipers and swat to collect taxes. Thats what happened. Dont cry when it happens to you if yyou let it happen to others america rip

  4. The imprisonment of these men is a farce and should be ended immediately. The Feds never expected their actions to be seen in the light of day, they are used to people cowering in fear and when that didn’t happen, they pushed hard. The overreach of the law is what should be dealt with here. This is in reality, a takeover by Harry Reid and his son and is simply about money. What are you people going to do if the decide they want YOUR land? Who will stand up for YOU?

    • What are we people going to do if they want OUR land?! Good question! It happened recently in my state!!

      In Oregon – we were really patient and just asked repeatedly for them to leave. That didn’t work. So, after 40 days of their land takeover, we requested the Feds help to remove them. Subsequently, Oregonians arrested some of the people who took over our land and we charged them for crimes they had videotaped and uploaded to YouTube during the takeover. Lesson: Don’t take OUR land.

    • We ARE talking about MY land – OUR land. The Bundys keep saying to “get off our land”, but it ISN”T their land. The Feds NEVER went on THEIR land. This happened on OUR land. That is why we want them to rot in jail. The Bundys tried to steal our land.

  5. Dave Bundy did nothing wrong. He took pictures from a public highway near the family ranch and was ordered to stop by government thugs. When he refused, they threw him to the ground and kicked him. They also threw a 50 year old woman to the ground. The government set up a free speech zone where protesters were ordered to go and if they refused, they would get beat up also. Dave Bundy was never armed and never made any threats of violence. This is a case of upside down, topsy turvy justice where the true guilty are free and the innocent are in prison.

    • Um, they almost got a whole bunch of people killed in the Bunkerville standoff. If not for prudent law enforcement officers they would also be charged with murder.

    • In addition to Lavoy, who had many delusional ideas on governance, the Bundy Gang is partly responsible for the justified shooting of Lavoy. It’s called felony murder: a killing treated as a murder because, though unintended, it occurred during the commission or attempted commission of a felony, or in this case, a whole slew of felonies.

      • Sir it is a waste of time to write this for you to understand. However for others who aren’t lap dogs for the administrative state, understanding is important. Please take the time to know the truth. The elution that many of us live under is that this nation is a Constitutional Republic. We falsely believe that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The naked truth is that the federal government does not recognize the Constitution as such. The administrative state use it own regulations, The Federal Codes is what the Bundy’s refuse to recognize. These Codes were written and continue to be written by unelected burocrate’s who do not recognize your rights as a citizens. The administrative state is your ruler and you are its subject. We the People are a nuisance, fear the administrative state, or do as the Bundy’s and others in the patriot movement and stand against an out of control bureaucracy.

  6. These people are dangerous to law and order. And their movement lies over and over about everything .. Everything. Sometimes with different lies. Court records and video recordings are real facts. Especially the unedited ones. I believe local county representives should be on a team with the blm to work out concerns. Many groups want to use the land so not everyone gets their way. These are antifederate confederates out to overthrow the federal government. Because of their selfishnesh
    And the constitutions meaning and structure of government is not to be decided by a bunch of uneducated thugs with guns .

    • First of all, it was BLM and their hired mercenaries and rustlers who had the guns. And if you want to actually find out about the issues, you should research the Taylor Grazing Act, as well as the Nevada Revised Statutes, and perhaps then you can explain why the money that BLM wanted for grazing fees, which was supposed to be returned to the State of Nevada and then eventually to Clark County, and back to the Bundys for range improvement, was getting sidetracked somewhere. And then perhaps you can look at the fact that the Bundy’s were grazing their cattle there long before there was a BLM or a Taylor Grazing Act. It was totally Nevada state land, Nevada having become a state, just a few years earlier. So how did the BLM get into that picture? This country was founded on the principle of separation of powers with legislative, executive and judicial branches being separate of each other, but once these alphabet agencies, like BLM, EPA and all the rest were established, they usurped all three powers unto themselves without any authority to do so. They just invented themselves to perpetuate their own existence.

      • “Bundy’s were grazing their cattle there long before there was a BLM or a Taylor Grazing Act.” Get your facts straight. The Bundys didn’t buy their ranch until the 40’s of 50’s, welll after the Taylor Grazing Act was enacted. Quit trying to excuse their crimes by rewriting history.

        • Correct. David Ammon Bundy, Cliven’s father, purchased the ranch that Cliven currently occupies in 1948 from the Leavitt family in Bunkerville. They first began to run cattle on the Gold Butte allotment in 1954. Although Cliven has ancestors on his mother’s side that did settle Bunkerville in the 1870’s, none of those lived on the current ranch nor did any of them graze the Gold Butte area. Much of Cliven’s claims of “prior beneficial use” of the land is a lie.

      • So don’t BLM and “hired mercenaries” have the same right to carry guns for self-defense as the “patriots”?

      • Timeline:
        1785, 1787 Land Ordinance of 1785 addresses federal use of lands in US.
        1789- US Constitution. US government allowed to own land under property clause. Natural resources on federal lands protected by U.S. Army.
        1812 General Land Office formed to administer federal lands.
        1934 Taylor Grazing Act sets grazing fees.
        1946 General Land Office combined with Office of Surveyor General and Grazing Service, reorganized and renamed BLM.
        1954 Bundy family begins grazing in the Bunkerville area for the first time, paying fees.
        1993 Bundy stops paying grazing fees.
        1998 after extensive enforcement efforts, Court order served to remove cattle.
        2013 followup order to remove cattle.
        2014 Court order to impound trespassing cattle.

        • The Taylor Grazing Act cannot apply to Clark County Nevada because and Act of Congress ceded a portion of Arizona Territory to the state of Nevada, United States Stautes at Large Thirty Ninth Congress Session 1 Chapter 73 enacted May 5, 1866 and accepted by the Nevada Legislature January 17, 1867. Clark County is not federal land.

          • Another hilarious misinterpretation of history and the law. It is true that a portion of Arizona Territory was annexed to Nevada and became Clark County. However, that land was already federally owned at that time and had been since the cession from Mexico in 1848. The act of moving the land to Nevada had absolutely no bearing on its federal ownership. You are repeating the ridiculous legal theory of Pete Santilli that will soon be laughed out of court.

        • Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 is written to address the pre-existing cession compacts and basis of the 1785 and 1787 land ordinances. The land ordinances, were put in place to positively effect the paying down of debt, establishing new states on equal footing with the original states whatsoever, and to dispose of (sell or transfer) the land for those expressed purposes only. The property clause in no way establishes ownership over the public lands and to the contrary it states unequivocally that it doesn’t serve to prejudice the claims the United States (collective states) or any particular State. The respective states agreed to cede the possession of their territories and any future claims based solely on the proper execution of the cession compacts. Article 6, Clause 1 also affirms the standing of the cession compacts against the general government established within the Constitution.

          Beyond that, the lands of the western states was purchased or satisfied the settlement of treaties through monies generated by the sale of the original territories, held within the general treasury. The federal government holds no money of its own to purchase any lands, they are acting on behalf of the states and for the benefit of and faithful execution of the grant of powers found within the Constitution. All of the Acts that are listed that attempt to make a bona fide claim to ownership or an implied power to use the lands beyond the expressed property types found in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 or to dispose of (sell or transfer) the lands is in violation of Article 6, Clause 2 that states that all laws must be made in accordance to the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment affirms that our general government must be delegated powers and no where within Article 4 does it confer any authority to the general government beyond the general terms of the cession compacts.

          Andrew Jackson in his December 4, 1833 veto message to Congress and the 1845 Pollard’s Lessee v Hagan Supreme Court ruling address the standing of the cession compacts along with the intent of the property clause. Congress was only given temporary authority over the public lands for the purpose of faithfully executing the trust placed in it for the establishment of new states and paying down debt.

  7. “The mothers had their children there, so it’s a situation where you see first hand the brutality to the cattle.”

    If it was such a threatening situation, why on earth were the kids there? I wouldn’t take my children into a situation where there might be shooting. Or were they human shields?

  8. No matter how rough of a day I’m having, all I need do to coax a smile out of myself is remember that the Bundys and Bundy supporters being behind bars and facing trial.

    • The Millers tried to come into the standoff. They were refused because of their criminal background. Now YOU do a little research. And while you’re at it read the Constitution. The Federal government is restricted to 10 miles square for the site of federal government. Territories were not owned by the feds, they simply acted as trustees and when that land became a state the federal government was require to cede the land to the new state. That is called “Equal Footing” so each state entered with the same federal rules as the original 13 colonies. The only instance where the feds took charge of land in a state was with the consent of the state legislature and was to be leased from the state. All court proceedings for the Bundys have been held in FEDERAL courts, which are illegal according to the Constitution. That’s a case of the feds using jurisdiction they don’t legally have, feds charging for grazing rights they don’t own, feds arresting legal landowners, and feds trying in courts they don’t legally own, and feds executing the findings of those illegal courts. Kind of like in Russia, Lybia, and the rest of the tyrannies in the world.

      90% of the land in Nevada is unconstitutionally claimed by the feds, and over 50% of all the western 12 states. That works out to 1/3 of all the land in the USA being clamed by the Federal Government. Sow who is the trespasser? 12 years ago there were 51 ranchers in Clark County. Now the Bundy are the only ones left. ALL the others were put out of business by one or more of the illegal federal agencies

      Furthermore, the 2nd Amendment says NO law can be written to infringe on the rights to own firearms. And the Declaration of Independence states in the 3rd paragraph that “it is the right, it is their DUTY to throw such government, and to provide new guards for their security.” That means the feds are guilty of treason, and the protestors are acting under the Supreme Law of the United States.

      Federal encroachment has been going on gradually for 150 years. Instead of believing everything you read and hear on the mainstream media about these so called standoffs is orchestrated to agree with the lies the feds hand out. So instead of demonizing the protestors and calling them derogatory names when you don’t know the facts, read the documents penned by the founding fathers to learn the REAL reason for the conflict.

      Robert Deihl, proud to be a patriot from Mesquite, NV

      • “Territories were not owned by the feds, they simply acted as trustees and when that land became a state the federal government was require to cede the land to the new state.” Really?? OK, Mr. research, tell us exactly where the Constitution, or any federal law, says that. You are delusional and fit in perfectly with the whole Bundy clan.

        • “the federal government was require to cede the land to the new state”

          If that had been true, most of the West would still be Territories, not States, like Puerto Rico.

          And if these bozos were to win their constitutional argument that the Statehood Acts were unconstitutional because they retained federal ownership rather than ceded to the states, the obvious legal fix would be:

          declare the western states non-existent due to the unconstitional nature of the Statehood Acts, kick their Senators out of the Senate, their voting Representatives out of the House, their Electors out of the Electoral College, and return them to Territorial Status.

          Then, Congress could consider new Statehood Acts and the eastern and midwestern parts of the country could decide whether having, say, Arizona become a state is worth giving up the Grand Canyon.

          Roll back the map to the day the Treaty of Hildago was signed, I say. That’s Constitutional for ya.

  9. What’s fascinating to me is how these rugged individualists went from cocky, arrogant heavily armed cowboys to whiney victims. Has anyone ever met a group of people who feel so sorry for themselves because of their very own actions? Did the families even think thru the consequences of their actions? No sympathy here.

  10. Too bad the Bundy women folk didn’t show so much concern over the fate of their men folk BEFORE they went on their crime spree. Tough on the families? I bet it is. This is what happens when you break a whole bunch of federal laws. Ladies, please do not pretend to be surprised at the current state of affairs – you were complicit by supporting them in their crimes. This all could have been avoided if the “patriots” had a lick of common sense.

  11. The Bundy’s are not Patriots or any type of hero. They do not stand for me and have NO authority over anyone. Putting up road blocks near Cliven’s property and stopping local people from going to town or to their homes is nothing but criminal! Bunch of thug militia members involved the 1st time when they had Sean Hannity on their side. But that is gone now, and they don’t even know how to surrender. Slow up and stop at a road block , not go off the road. Get out when told and surrender, not jump around and look like you are going for a gun in your jacket. Stupid idiots! When you finally get your land back to give to the Koch Brothers there will be another trial for the land. The people who had claim to it first. Native Americans will have more of a right to it than the stupid cry baby Bundy’s!!!

  12. I’m also from Oregon. I hope they all spend decades in jail. Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time. And the whiny women need to get themselves to some kind of job training because they are now the bread winners. I can’t help but wonder…aren’t you wives just a little angry at your arrogant, ignorant husbands who have left you in this situation?

  13. Thirty Ninth Congress, Session 1 Chapter 73, United States Statutes at Large an Act of Congress to add the territory that is now Clark County to the existing state of Nevada, enacted on May 5, 1866 by Congress. This act was subject to acceptance by the Nevada Legislature. The Nevada Legislature approved the act January 17, 1887. Clark County was formed in 1909. It was formed from land that was previously Arizona Territory. Clark County Nevada never was Federal property. The territory was ceded to Nevada by the United States Congress and accepted by the Nevada Legislature before Clark County existed.

    • You are so wrong it makes me laugh. When Congress transferred that land from the Arizona Territory, it was already federally owned and became part of Lincoln County, Nevada. Clark County came into being when the state legislature lopped off that portion of Lincoln County and created the new county. None of those facts affect the federal ownership at all.

      • When Congress ceded that land to Nevada and the Nevada legislature accepted it became state land. The United States retained title to the land until it is sold. They ceded jurisdition to Nevada. It is no longer federal land once it is made a state it then becomes public land.


        Federal Land Retention and the Constitution’s Property Clause: e Original Understanding
        Robert G. Natelson
        University of Montana School of Law

        • There is absolutely no case law that supports your assertion. You even misread your own link. The critical passage is:

          “the liberals are correct in suggesting that those lands are subject to a public trust and cannot be ceded to the respective states without compensation.”

          Moreover, your link is simply a law review opinion, not a particularly compelling one either, with no force of law. If you had read it carefully, you would realize that the author only advocates that the federal government is compelled to dispose of territorial land to PRIVATE individuals, not to state governments. Nothing in the article supports your contention that the ownership of the land reverted to the state of Nevada when the territorial land was transferred into the boundaries of the state. Your use of the term “public land” has no legal meaning.

          Additionally, there is absolutely no history of the federal government ceding ownership of land to state governments other than very specific parcels explicitly designated within the respective enabling acts of those states.

          In short, nothing in the law supports your view.

  14. It is just breathtaking for me how the Tumbleweed Terrorists went from tough, rugged cowboys to whiney victims in like two seconds flat. The shameless videos that exploit their children (I want my daddy back!), and the calculated cluelessness of the wives, who after all encouraged, aided and abetted their husbands. It is just remarkable the alternate universe they inhabit, and both fascinating and cringeworthy to see their fantasy world butt up against what we call reality.

  15. You hypocrites in the “patriot” and militia movement (domestic terrorists in my book) are as ignorant on your Bible as you are on the Constitution.

    Romans 13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

    6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

    Your men belong in jail with the other criminals; deal with it.

  16. The children are victims of adults who care more about being right than they do about the reality of their legal rights. They will be completely brain washed soon, if not already, and will grow up to be just like their parents. Sad.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here