Reid doubles down: bundy supporters are domestic violent terrorists wannabes

[rangerrebew]

Reid DOUBLES DOWN: Bundy supporters ‘domestic, violent terrorist wannabes’ [VIDEO]

Posted By Brendan Bordelon On 7:11 PM 04/18/2014 In | No Comments


Nevada Democratic Sen. Harry Reid refused to back down from his inflammatory branding of Cliven Bundy supporters as “domestic terrorists,” calling people who turned out to support the rancher “domestic, violent terrorist wannabes” on Friday and sparring with his Republican counterpart who labelled them “patriots.”

Reid took hits from many sides yesterday for his controversial comments — including from Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul, who called on Reid to “calm the rhetoric” or risk inciting real violence (RELATED: After ‘domestic terrorist’ remark, Rand Paul urges Harry Reid to ‘calm the rhetoric’ on Cliven Bundy).

But instead of cooling it, Reid doubled down during an appearance with Nevada Republican Senator Dean Heller on “What’s Your Point,” a local Las Vegas news program.

“Bundy doesn’t believe that the American government is valid, he believes the United States is a foreign government,” Reid claimed. “He doesn’t pay his taxes, he doesn’t follow the law. He doesn’t pay his fees.”

“And if anyone thinks by any figment of their imagination that what happened up there last week was, people rallying to somebody that was oppressed,” he continued, “600 people came in, armed. They had practiced, they had maneuvered. They knew what they were doing.”

He noted that some of the protesters had set up firing positions opposite Bureau of Land Management agents, who had been menacing unarmed Americans with high-grade military weaponry for days.

“If there were ever an example of people who were domestic, violent terrorist wannabes, these are the guys,” he declared.

“But no one called Bundy a domestic terrorist,” Reid also hastened to add. “I said the people that came there were.”

Heller had a very different interpretation. “What Sen. Reid may call domestic terrorists, I call patriots,” he asserted.

Reid hit back: “If these people think they’re patriots, they’re not,” he said. “I use that word typically. But if they’re patriots, we’re in big trouble.”

“Well it’s a pretty broad brush,” Heller countered. “Pretty broad brush when you have Boy Scouts there. You have veterans at the event. You have grandparents at the event.”

“I take more issue at the BLM coming in with a paramilitary army than individuals with snipers,” the Republican lawmaker. “And I’m talking to people and groups that were there at the event. And having your own government with sniper lenses on you, it made a lot of people very uncomfortable.”

“There was no army!” Reid replied. “And that land — 300,000 acres, federal land — has been basically decimated by this guy.”

Follow Brendan on Twitter

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article printed from The Daily Caller: http://dailycaller.com

URL to article: http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/18/reid-doubles-down-bundy-supporters-domestic-violent-terrorist-wannabes-video/

[EC]

“And that land — 300,000 acres, federal land — has been basically decimated by this guy.”

So, Dingy Harry. A family that has worked and used and improved that land for longer than even you have been alive has decimated the land.

First - you are so full of shit your eyes are dark brown.

Second - Look up the actual meaning of decimated. By BLM regulations, their herd is allowed to consume 40% of the fodder per year.

[Chieftain]

How does he say these things and keep getting reelected??  He must have as many hardcore communists in his district as Nazi Pelousy does in hers.

[240B]

How does he say these things and keep getting reelected??  He must have as many hardcore communists in his district as Nazi Pelousy does in hers.

It is beacuse elections are 'fixed'. Why does Boxer, Pelosi, Reid, and all the rest of them keep getting elected over and over and over and over? It is a rigged game.
 
The founding fathers, the foundation of America is built on the idea that normal people behave with at least some dignity and honor. The Democrat Party has none of this.
 
When you get a gang in office, of people who have no moral compass, a bunch of people who worship nothing but themselves and money, then you get what is current day America.

[Bigun]

So, Dingy Harry. A family that has worked and used and improved that land for longer than even you have been alive has decimated the land.

First - you are so full of shit your eyes are dark brown.

Second - Look up the actual meaning of decimated. By BLM regulations, their herd is allowed to consume 40% of the fodder per year.

AMEN!

The Bundy position is the Constitutional position. The Constitution, as you know, stands supreme over every law or action. The only thing that supersedes the Constitution are “first principles.” The fundamental principles of natural law, including unalienable rights. The Constitution states that once a state is admitted into the union, it is admitted at an equal footing as all other states. This was specifically done to prevent congress from bribing a territory in giving something to the feds in exchange for making them a state. Once a state is formed all federal lands, therefore, become the states. This happened when all the early states were admitted. But things changed for the western states, Congress began allowing the new states to join the union only if they agreed to leave huge percentages to the feds, over 80% in Nevada’s case. This brought the new states in with a lesser footing than the others—unconstitutional.

Secondly, the Constitution only provides four reasons in which the feds can own state lands, 1) Forts, 2) Magazines and Arsenals, 3) Docks and Boat Yards, and 4) Other needful buildings, such as post offices. And the feds can only own state land for those four purposes with the consent of the state legislature. So, if the feds wanted to keep Nevada land when they became a state the land could only be used for those four reasons. It was not legal for the feds to keep the land in the first place.

So, the feds have been violating the Constitution since 1864 by holding state lands unconstitutionally. This is what the “sagebrush rebellion” is all about. The name for the court case that has been litigated between the western states and the feds for more than 30 years.

The real issue here is that the feds have been violating the Constitution for more than 150 years in the western states and some strong patriots in Nevada are finally saying enough is enough. Are the Bundys really breaking the law if the laws that they are not complying with are unconstitutional? Jefferson and Madison would say no in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. They declare that an unconstitutional law is no law at all. Many of the civil rights law violations were people ignoring laws that were unconstitutional, a great example of correct civil disobedience.

If the Constitutional supremacy argument does satisfy and one is to assume the feds own and control the land constitutionally, then it should be remembered that The Bundy family purchased the grazing and water rights on the land in the 1880’s from the feds. That has never been rescinded. The payments that they have not paid are not the grazing and water rights, but the BLM fees. The BLM was originally created to help ranchers manage public lands that ranchers had paid for the grazing and water rights to. They were a service agency, not a regulatory agency. Once they discontinued providing that service, and worse, began using the rancher’s money to push the ranchers off the land, the Bundys discontinued payments. They were not going to pay for services not rendered. Failing to pay the BLM fees does not remove the grazing and water rights that they had originally paid for.

[rangerrebew]

So, the feds have been violating the Constitution since 1864 by holding state lands unconstitutionally. This is what the “sagebrush rebellion” is all about. The name for the court case that has been litigated between the western states and the feds for more than 30 years.

Remember Kelo vs New London?  The Supreme Soviet said governments could take land for enhanced "economic development?"  A phenomenal success.  I'm sure this is what Reid was going on, a Chinese plant would bring more "economic development."

Nine Years After Kelo vs New London - The Aftermath

 By
DCE
 on March 21, 2014 9:18 PM  | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

About nine years ago the US Supreme Court handed down its decision in the Kelo vs New London case, deciding 5-4 that the city of New London, Connecticut had the right to seize pprivate property by eminent domain for the purpose of private development, something the city had hoped would raise much needed tax revenues.

 But after the decision that allowed the city to move forward and seize the final few properties that had been part of the kelo suit, things didn't turn out as the city had planned.


In the landmark 5-4 ruling, named for the lead plaintiff, a nurse named Susette Kelo, the Supreme Court upheld a state Supreme Court ruling that the city of 27,000 and a nonprofit entity called the New London Development Corp. were entitled to seize those properties in the name of economic development. Previously, eminent domain had been seen as limited to cases involving projects deemed as benefiting the public, but not a private economic interest.

 So how does New London, specifically Fort Trumbull, look now? (Fort Trumbull was the neighborhood affected by the Kelo decision - dce)

 "The homeowners were dispossessed for nothing," wrote The Boston Globe's Jeff Jacoby. "Fort Trumbull was never redeveloped. Pfizer itself bailed out of New London in 2009. The Kelo decision was a disaster, as even the city's present political leaders acknowledge."


Where a neighborhood once filled with residents stood, barren yards filled with nothing but weeds and abandoned utilities along empty streets are all one sees. The hoped for economic development never happened, with pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, one of the linchpins of the redevelopment effort, pulling up stakes and leaving, taking 1500 jobs with it when it left. That was after New London had already offered an 80% 10-year tax abatement to the corporation as an enticement to locate a $300 million research facility in the city.

 Between its legal costs in fighting the class action suit, the money it spent reimbursing property owners for the loss of their properties under eminent domain, and the never achieved tax revenues it had counted on, the city lost millions of dollars. The city also became a symbol of overreaching government, one used to change eminent domain laws in over 40 states, with some going as far as amending their state constitutions to narrowly limit the scope of eminent domain, preventing a future outcome like that of New London. (My home state of New Hampshire is one of the seven states that amended its constitution to better secure the property rights of its citizens.)

 Though Kelo is nine years in the past, it is still having long term effects on the property rights of landowners and limiting the overreach of governments, state and local. If the government is going to use the power of eminent domain, it now has to have a much better justification than "We need the revenue redevelopment by a private entity will generate for the tax coffers."

http://weekendpundit.org/2014/03/nine-years-after-kelo-vs-new-l.html

[ABX]

How does he say these things and keep getting reelected??  He must have as many hardcore communists in his district as Nazi Pelousy does in hers.

Watch Idiocracy. That is about 60% of the population and growing. Las Vegas has a disproportionate amount of those who fit in that category.

[rangerrebew]

Watch Idiocracy. That is about 60% of the population and growing. Las Vegas has a disproportionate amount of those who fit in that category.

The federal government's elected representatives set the bar very high on idiocracy.