QUESTION: Is it true that nearly 80% of Nevada is still owned by the Federal Government who then pays no tax to the State of Nevada? This seems very strange if true as a backdrop to this entire Bundy affair.
Via Martin Armstrong of Armstrong Economics,
REPLY: The truth behind Nevada is of course just a quagmire of politics. Nevada was a key pawn in getting Abraham Lincoln reelected in 1864 during the middle of the Civil War. Back on March 21st, 1864, the US Congress enacted the Nevada Statehood statute that authorized the residents of Nevada Territory to elect representatives to a convention for the purpose of having Nevada join the Union. This is where we find the origin of the fight going on in Nevada that the left-wing TV commenters (pretend-journalists) today call a right-wing uprising that should be put down at all costs. The current land conflict in Nevada extends back to this event in 1864 and how the territory of Nevada became a state in order to push through a political agenda to create a majority vote. I have said numerous times, if you want the truth, just follow the money.
The “law” at the time in 1864 required that for a territory to become a state, the population had to be at least 60,000. At that time, Nevada had only about 40,000 people. So why was Nevada rushed into statehood in violation of the law of the day? When the 1864 Presidential election approached, there were special interests who were seeking to manipulate the elections to ensure Lincoln would win reelection. They needed another Republican congressional delegation that could provide additional votes for the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to abolish slavery. Previously, the attempt failed by a very narrow margin that required two-thirds support of both houses of Congress.
The fear rising for the 1864 election was that there might arise three major candidates running. There was Abraham Lincoln of the National Union Party, George B. McClellan of the Democratic Party, and John Charles Frémont (1813–1890) of the Radical Democracy Party. It was actually Frémont who was the first anti-slavery Republican nominee back in the 1940s. During the Civil War, he held a military command and was the first to issue an emancipation edict that freed slaves in his district. Lincoln maybe credited for his stand, but he was a politician first. Lincoln relieved Frémont of his command for insubordination. Therefore, the Radical Democracy Party was the one demanding emancipation of all slaves.
With the Republicans splitting over how far to go with some supporting complete equal rights and others questioning going that far, the Democrats were pounding their chests and hoped to use the split in the Republicans to their advantage. The New York World was a newspaper published in New York City from 1860 until 1931 that was the mouth-piece for the Democrats. From 1883 to 1911 it was under the notorious publisher Joseph Pulitzer (1847–1911), who started the Spanish-American war by publishing false information just to sell his newspapers. Nonetheless, it was the New World that was desperately trying to ensure the defeat of Lincoln. It was perhaps their bravado that led to the Republicans state of panic that led to the maneuver to get Nevada into a voting position.
The greatest fear, thanks to the New York World, became what would happen if the vote was fragmented (which we could see in 2016) and no party could achieve a majority of electoral votes. Consequently, the election would then be thrown into the House of Representatives, where each state would have only one vote. Consequently, the Republicans believed they needed Nevada on their side for this would give them an equal vote with every other state despite the tiny amount of people actually living there. Moreover, the Republicans needed two more loyal Unionist votes in the U.S. Senate to also ensure that the Thirteenth Amendment would be passed. Nevada’s entry would secure both the election and the three-fourths majority needed for the Thirteenth Amendment enactment.
The votes at the end of the day demonstrate that they never needed Nevada. Nonetheless, within the provisions of the Statehood Act of March 21, 1864 that brought Nevada into the voting fold, we see the source of the problem today. This Statehood Act retained the ownership of the land as a territory for the federal government. In return for the Statehood that was really against the law, the new state surrendered any right, title, or claim to the unappropriated public lands lying within Nevada. Moreover, this cannot be altered without the consent of the Feds. Hence, the people of Nevada cannot claim any land whatsoever because politicians needed Nevada for the 1864 election but did not want to hand-over anything in return. This was a typical political one-sided deal.
Republican Ronald Reagan had argued for the turnover of the control of such lands to the state and local authorities back in 1980. Clearly, the surrender of all claims to any land for statehood was illegal under the Constitution. This is no different from Russia seizing Crimea. The Supreme Court actually addressed this issue in Pollard’s Lessee v. Hagan, 44 U.S. 212 (1845) when Alabama became a state in 1845. The question presented was concerning a clause where it was stated “that all navigable waters within the said State shall forever remain public highways, free to the citizens of said State, and of the United States, without any tax, duty, impost, or toll therefor imposed by said State.” The Supreme Court held that this clause was constitutional because it “conveys no more power over the navigable waters of Alabama to the Government of the United States than it possesses over the navigable waters of other States under the provisions of the Constitution.”
The Pollard decision expressed a statement of constitutional law in dictum making it very clear that the Feds have no claim over the lands in Nevada. The Supreme Court states:
The United States never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in and to the territory of which Alabama, or any of the new States, were formed, except for temporary purposes, and to execute the trusts created by the acts of the Virginia and Georgia legislatures, and the deeds of cession executed by them to the United States, and the trust created by the treaty of the 30th April, 1803, with the French Republic ceding Louisiana.
So in other words, once a territory becomes a state, the Fed must surrender all claims to the land as if it were still just a possession or territory.
Sorry, but to all the left-wing commentators who call Bundy a tax-cheat and an outlaw, be careful of what you speak for the Supreme Court has made it clear in 1845 that the Constitution forbids the federal rangers to be out there to begin with for the Feds could not retain ownership of the territory and simultaneously grant state sovereignty. At the very minimum, it became state land – not federal.
looks like at least 4 didnt graduate high school
That's all you have? lol. You came to fight club with a "convince me you graduated high school" meme? Ha!
convince anyone you graduated grade 10.
Ricky, is that you?
Sir j8h9,
You have obviously NOT read the Grazing Act of 1939. In other words sir, you know DIK.
Those cows are scoring the grass - not the land itself. And that seems to be legal ...
You live in an apartment or a subdivision with a nice lawn dontcha?
"a case of another person trying to avoid taking personal responsibility for their actions."
Like the whole of congress, Wall St., K Street, and Corporate St?
And let's remember that Martin Armstrong is a convicted felon, a Ponzi schemer, who probably learned the law while in jail. I suppose, according to Martin, the National Parks and Monuments have no right to existence, nor do Interstate Highways. Armstrong is no Constituional scholar.
Are you nuts? Bundy isn't anti-government. Nevada has a government and he's said not a word against it.
thats funny, somehow armstrong thinks the law is at issue here. The issue is simply one of institutional weakness versus decnetralized strength. the subject territories, and their peoples, under the federal government are sensing weakness by getting together and showing their numbers. this occurs regularly in history.
look at the early history of the u.s. gaining independence....a historical example of this phenomena.
while the united states is claimed to have succeeded in it revolution against the british due to the fact that formerly british lawyers , with training in common law, helped establish legal self dominion in the united states, including the formation of parliaments and a legal basis for separtion from the british, it is clear that this is just a bunch of historical nonsense.
LAWYERS HAVE NEVER SET ANYBODY FREE NEITHER HAS A LEGAL SYSTEM . LEGAL SYSTEMS ARE A SYMPTOM OF SEPARATION.
THE CAUSE OF SEPARTION IS POWER TO ESTABLISH DOMINION AND TERRITORIAL CONTROL.
the united states was able to separate from the british becuase it had sufficient weaponry , people, and french money provided by FRENCH BANKERS to fight the british.
it really is that simple.
martin armstrong is pretty funny. i guess he got a little carried away by all the time he spent in jail. if there's one thing however he should have learned from his imprisonment, it's that law is a cover for political action operating though human beings.
the law , has always been , like religion, an ideology for establishing more precise control by human beings, over larger numbers of human beings underneath them.
that the concept of 'law' has succeeded so wildly in history, is not a testament to the instrinsic integrity of philosphy , but to the extrinsic functionality of 'law' as a method of communicating power and control relative to the 'not law'.
'law' as a concept operating through 'legal institutions' fundmenatally all of which are backed by violence works better than the absence of 'law' because it provides predictability where there was none before.
it is very possible in a science fiction future , where all human beings can be psychologically integrated into an instant mass communication system-------
that 'law' as a systemic method of control could be replaced by functionally superior methods of control and organization. it's possible these systems can continue to be referred to as 'legal' or whatever.
but do 'rules' or 'guidelines' subject to instantaneous and continuous overide by instantaneous human overlord guidance comprise 'law' .
perhaps martin armstrong can invent a fairy tale world of the future, jsut as well as he engages fairy tales of the past that he would like his audience to believe is 'history'
HISTORY IS NOTHING BUT A SET OF LIES AGREED UPON. INCLUDING THE HISTORY OF 'LAW'.
nicely put.
well, political law.. i kind of hope that property and criminal law governing property and damages against people are adjudicated according to common (sense) law and precedent.
Less often than one would hope, actually. Law is supposed to be logical, just, precedential, etc., but it's really about 60% political.
Thank you sir. May I have another?
I think you confused systemic with systematic. Never the less, you make an interesting argument for fomenting anarchy, so your services may very well be needed soon. However we have more than enough ambiguity built into our constitutional rights and the natural, fundamental and entrenched rights inherent and defined in state and federal property laws and established case law to fill a dozen libraries.
It's almost a given the Bundy case could end up in the Supreme Court, that's if civil war can be averted. It's possible little will get resolved in either man's lifetime. Reid's best defense will be making his claim more toward benefiting the public good (solar power generation), an argument which has outweighed and trumped the rights of individual and state landholders in the past. First Bundy or the Nevada legislature has to establish the land belongs to the state.
So, the Federal jack boots were overstepping?
Fuck the fed they have no right.
To summarize: "We'll do what they tell us to do until we won't."
That sounds about right. I'm all for it, too.
Who run Bartertown?
Note to White house, Capitol Hill, and the other odious, shit-stained halls of power: it's really not you.
Lloyd run Bartertown! (Sorry, but that's a preconditioned reaction) :-)
Goldman's run Bartertown.
Americans are waking up to the realities of the so called Freedom, rights and constitution, habeus corpus etc- that it all does not exist.
Criminals are in charge
Those with the guns make the rules - that has always been true from the day the first caveman threw a rock. The Feds have more guns than the state of Nevada, so ownership goes to the Feds. Every state has also been bought out by the Fed feeding trough, so there will be no challenge as long as the money keeps flowing.
The Bundy ranch is NOT an exception - the so-named 'domestic terrorists' outgunned the BLM -- at least for that day -- so the new rule became 'BLM go home'.
Lesson learned:
If you can rally enough gun toters, then you may violate any law you want...
So in the end every law comes from the barrel of a gun ....
The Lead Rule:
He with the lead makes the rules.
So in the end every law comes from the barrel of a gun ....
This is the truest, most accurate and relevant statement in this entire thread. Mao was right. Out government is based on compliance through force, and will continue to be so until we en-masse decide to no longer comply.
It is not the number or size of the guns that wins in the end, but how you use the guns you have.
See Vietnam vs. DC US, Iraq vs. DC US, Afghanistan vs. just about everybody, etc.
Vietnam is especially relevant.
"The guillotine will set you free."
I think you need to do a gun re-count. Pretty sure the feds do NOT have more guns + shooters than Nevada can amass, nor Texas.
They have drones, nerve gas & assorted goodies but they intend to blame another nation when used which means they intend to hit a large city-sized target, not a ranch, and they can't use that trick twice just like they can't use 9/11 twice.
As we saw at Waco, the DC US' treasonous thugs are pussies when confronted with real resistance. The Davidians handed these lucre seeking pussies their ass. The only reason more of the treasonous thugs didn't die is because the Davidians had compassion. As we saw later, the DC US thugs did not have compassion.
No the thugs fight for lucre, we, the American people fight for Liberty and truth.
Liberty will always win over lucre.
No more Wacos. No quarter for treason.
The Four Rs
Rejection: Quit paying, quit obeying, quit playing.
Revolution: It is inevitable, so prepare, as they are.
Retribution: Is there really any place for these sociopaths and criminals in a
restored civil and Constitutional society?!
Restoration: Restore the Constitutional republic.
5th R: Roll tha muthafuckin guillotines.
I agree with the spirit of your post, but forget the piece of paper called the constitution. Much better to return to the system the native americans had.
Before you flip out, consider what that means. It means a world in which humans who wish to be sheeple-chimps can be sheeple-chimps... but have a wide variety of flavors to choose from. So if they don't like the "rules of behavior" in tribe_23, maybe they'll like the "rules of behavior" in tribe_47 or tribe_09. Let them choose what kind of sheeple-chimp existence they prefer to live, and join the relevant tribe.
But now please notice the more important part of this system, which I call "no mans land". That is "everywhere not inside any tribe settlement/village". Out in "no mans land" you cannot count on protection by anyone else. You have no "pact" or "understanding" with any tribe, so you're on your own no matter what happens. If you can't deal with the wild animals, you become their meal. If you can't find or grow enough food, you starve to death.
Of course, you can move to some empty area in "no mans land" with your family and/or friends... that works too, and lets you enjoy some of the advantages of specialization and division of labor.
Plus, of course, people still trade. Even a cursory check of history reveals two facts. Most tribes and settlements [and private individuals in no-mans-land] permitted outsiders to "pass through" for purposes of trade. And individuals who lived in various areas of "no mans land" would commonly establish random and recurring trades. Everyone benefitted from trade, and everyone knew it (which is why it was considered so commonly acceptable).
Without going into more detail, I suspect you understand this point. The whole "constitution" approach was tried and does not work. My opinion is, any such approach cannot work. As long as a planet has abundant "no mans land", the degree to which predators can impose insane rules on the sheeple-chimps in their tribe is limited. When the rules are too absurd, sheeple-chimps leave for other tribes. If and when all tribes start to impose overly oppressive rules, even sheeple-chimps start to recognize the attractiveness of living the life of an individualist in "no mans land".
But earth is now far too populated. Anywhere an accepted fictional structure like "government" exists, the most egregious and dedicated predators always find a way to dominate. Such is the history of mankind, so don't bother denying it.
And please, nobody should insult our intelligence with the notion that the patterns of ink smeared on a piece of paper will somehow limit the power and dominance predators can acquire, or limit the abuses those predators will practice. The USSA is the most grossly police-state and hyper-military of any nation in the history of mankind, with 700+ military bases scattered around the world (in other countries), an enormous budget, and a policy that they themselves openly and proudly characterize as "full spectrum dominance".
So, I agree with your sentiment, but please. All of us who believe in honesty, ethics, production and benevolence must abandon any illusion that fictions like "government" or "corporation" can possibly play any legitimate role in a benevolent future. They cannot.
Humans have been ruled by fiction-wielding predators for too long.
It is common knowledge among common Americans that the STATES CREATED THE FEDERAL government and were NOT bound to the compact of being United (ie-married forever) as sucinctly evidenced by the Kentucky Resolution of 1798 (Tommy Jefferson) and the Virginia Resolution (Adams). If the state(s) were part of the union, then they had to abide by the 17 enumerated powers of the Constitution. That said, it is superfluous to say that the Feds had to abide by same Constitution. The Feds cannot take land outside of DC. Since the FedGov continues to break any and all of the rules created by the states laid out in said Constitution, and has so since the beginning, it falls to the states to abutt the FedGov. If the elected officials in the state are too interested in say, topless dancers and 11 year old bois, to do the people's bidding, then there's a real problem. Read the2nd amendment. It says the "...militia is NECESSARY to the SECURITY OF A STATE..." (in part). Study common law.
The predators-that-be don't care one bit what their own fictional laws are. Their guide to action is the predator modus-operandi, which is "get away with whatever you want and think you can get away with". There are no other constrains, and the predators know their "laws" are pure fiction, and only serve to confuse their stupid prey.
Whom you described as the predators aren't necessarily the ones facing off and standing on the front lines. Many put themselves in harm's way because their emotions and let's face it, seventy-five years of Hollywood scripts told them to - they are the embodiment of the iconic white-hatted, red-blooded, All American cowboys of the past fighting the vagaries and opaqueness of a system designed to cheat one of them out of what's rightfully his, and by association soon it will be all of them.
On the other side of the line stand the self-righteous few, doing their one singular job of upholding the law of the land. For them it's simple. It's not up to them to interpret the law. For them its black and white. They only enforce it. They are the ones who dare to put themselves on the line, held back only by the restraint they must exhibit while the world is watching. They cannot walk away without coming back. Their job is to maim and kill and they love what they do.
The truth lies somewhere in the middle. Same as what's happening over in the Ukraine. What's more significant is that the enforcers are doing the bidding of those who will never be put in jeopardy, physically or financially, and this is the real injustice.
Pretty sure when they're stealing cattle, killing them and taking the land to sell to China they know they're not wearing the white hats.
much like causing global warming, getting rich off it, and pretending there isn't any because the sheeple of Murrika aren't smart enough to use thermometers.
Maybe so, but we invented the thermostat.
While the AGW crowd builds extra reflective walls around, and asphalt parking lots beneath thermostats... and then gasps when they find temperature changes... then run around screaming "we're all gonna die, so let's make sure we all die as impoverished slaves!".
You do realize there's buoys and satellites measuring temperatures far from streets, cars or even land, right? No? You didn't realize that's happening?
Of course! SOME of the data-points are indeed [seemingly] valid. Those that are not skew the averages, however.
Analytical proof, please. Given that satellites scour the entire Earth it looks like you can't be right.
An article in Reason magazine explores the ambiguities of the case:
http://reason.com/blog/2014/04/18/the-bundy-ranch-standoff-and-attitudes-t
Not only land, the Fed controls Income taxes and Your Social Insurance Number.
All finances were signed over to them. A private bank, one system who don't care about the main Population, power and control.
When they tell you to fight , You Will Fight.......Debts must be paid, even if the debts were paid to them by them , you must pay it back.....at interest.
End the Fed,
Now you get it...
Your talking about The Fight Club.
What are those rules again????
Here you go:
1st RULE: You do not talk about FIGHT CLUB.
2nd RULE: You DO NOT talk about FIGHT CLUB.
3rd RULE: If someone says "stop" or goes limp, taps out the fight is over.
4th RULE: Only two guys to a fight.
5th RULE: One fight at a time.
6th RULE: No shirts, no shoes.
7th RULE: Fights will go on as long as they have to.
8th RULE: If this is your first night at FIGHT CLUB, you HAVE to fight.
Next time, heed the first rule and just link here: http://www.diggingforfire.net/FightClub/ :-)
Who gives a shit what the .gov does or says. While you folks worry about all kinds of really stupid laws and who is doing what to whom. My .02 cents is this - The .gov is only in charge of the land that they are standing on. Once they leave, they ain't in charge no more.
Do you see what I did there?????
I'm thinking people care what land is stolen, how much & with how many firearms and a little prep for it is in order. What the .gov agencies say helps direct where such terrorism will be put upon the people by .gov. They can misdirect but lately they seem to feel no need to be coy.
"Do you see what I did there?????"
Ya: it's called Failing.
Once they stand on it and own it they can sell it and the next buyer will use lots of guns to make sure you never get it back. They'll expand too, using more .gov until they own all the land you once had, home and all. If you resist later you'll be shot. If you resist now you might not be shot. If you sell your land early and leave the USA you might be safe financially & physically.
BLM Whistleblower...now this one should go viral.
Theft talks among thieves...
'Americans' speaking of who should own the land.
This is funny.
Now BLM is fucking WITH texas, and I believe that is not a good thing to do.
http://wearechange.org/blm-claims-90000-acres-belong-texas-attempts-seiz...
The federal government has no authority what so ever because they have murdered their opponents to the federal reserve in a horrible accident!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOca_wTZ5BQ
and finally the icing on the cake on who owns washington dcs land.
http://share.pho.to/5LFzr
take care everyone. I wish you the best during these interesting times.
I'd have got away with it if it wasn't for you damn meddling kids.
China owns all federal lands-used by the US as collateral for buying our debt; Im pretty sure that China knows they will NEVER be paid back by us, and we will find huge ricefields in Nevada; and what happened to all the Militia that were coming to his rescue? Even the Nevada Cattlemens Association dragged their feet in getting involved
Meanwhile at HR Desert Solar HQ in Shanghai...
Big Mao: Wha da fruck go on in Nev-rada wiff Blundy?
Little Mo: Re-rax -no ploblem! Hally Leed say he da raw! He take care of everyfink- spresharee Blundy! -when next check alive...
The BLM as an organization reports to the Department of the Interior, which in turn is just another Executive Branch Alphabet Agency. As noted in the article and some other comments, it’s purpose was meant to be a temporary trustee of the lands which fell into a sort of purgatory until such time as the state in which the lands fell could assume proper control, i.e. collect taxes / income from it’s assignment to the private sector.
It did so by making the land available to any citizen willing to put it to productive use by way of mining, grazing, timber, railroads, etc. Like any good alphabet agency, its employees and political leaders have fought to maintain control over a theoretically temporary and diminishing role by increasing their importance and thereby assuring its own existence in perpetuity.
The Clinton administration politicized its role from trustee with the purpose of disposing to the state and local governments and instead allocated the responsibilities to “public” domain and muddled the EPA with their EIRs and other onerous requirements which in essence intimidated respective states from being able to oversee the transition of these real estate holdings into the private sector and becoming productive tax generating assets.
Now, instead of any individual US citizen being allowed to gain possession, the opportunity to gain from productive use and transfer deeds are now the sole activity of only the most wealthy and well-connected oligarchs and multi-nationals, hence the need for Teneo or a senator to effectively work through their self-created malaises.
And now that tax generating is rapidly becoming an irrelevant activity, due to the immaculate conception of currency from Congressional interest bearing notes, no government agency should ever have to worry about collecting taxes again. But watch the IRS start screaming when they realize they’re no longer needed due to their being outsourced to Yellen and her FAA authorized flights of fancy.
Jmo.
ZIONS BANK, REID BUNKERVILLE LLC, CEDARS DEVELOPMENT CORP, REID FAMILY, zerocost transfer of federal land to private interests, resale of small parcels of prior federal land at 20x the market from private parties back to fed govt, WATER WATER WATER... magnesium dolomite for tomahawk missle fuel, remote secure location for military industrial complex use, interstate interchanges and multimillion dollar hiwghways leading nowhere...... NOTHING SUSPECT, ILLEGAL or CRONY KICKBACK GOING ON HERE..... just keep paying those taxes and shut the fuck up youre a terrorist..... oh, and a racist.... this is a great opportunity to reel in the government which has violated the Constitution and uses rule/law making federal agencies to pass binding "law" bypassing Congress, which has abrogated its balance of power authority granted in the Constitution. Teh are derelict in executing thier duty and have left a power vacuum filled illegally by the executive branch... Only a few are worthy of the office the rest aree crooks selling amerika out for pennies on the dollar... NOW PERHAPS AMERICANS WILL WAKE UP.......
Yawn!
Harry's been hit one too many times in the head. Got caught with his corrupt hanging out. Nevada should take care of him in '16 if they don't they get what they deserve. States' rights died at Appomattox! That said, when the federal governmetn turns into a private cabal and supreme court justices refuse to recognize inalienable rights of then people the people are correct to handle the problem themselves. Never EVER forget a gun always is the final solution to all overbearing tyranny. THAT is why the federal government doesn't want you to have one. It is an absolute limit on what can be taken illegally and with instantaneous news it can be deadly effective at exposing rank courruption in what used to be our federal government. Other than the "crocadile tears" pandering to the left about the horrors that occur when guns are handled irresponsibly our government doens't give a holy shit about who gets shot. Their whole concern is to limit guns and gun ownership in order to further their agenda of perpetual ownership of a courrupt banking system where they can print money at will and give it to their friends and thus stay in power forever. If this completely corrupt governmetn isn't changed through the voting process, it will the the point of a gun that will limit their destruction of our economic system and they know this fully and probably discuss it quite frequently. Pass the popcorn!
Technically, the feederal government took control in 1934. It claimed full ownership in 1976 which started the Sagebrush Rebellion.
In the 1980s Reagan and Orin Hatch attempted to privatize the federal lands.
But ddon't forget. Bundy lost in court. He lost in *federal court*. If you and I had a dispute over land and I could force you into my court, guess who would win?
Great article.
So Nevada is not a State and Reid is not a Senator but a puff buddy pimp of the left.
Who should be in prison.
So, according to all these well-researched and supported legal theories, the federal government has no power to prevent logging, mining, drilling for oil and gas, or drilling for water in national parks and national forests.
So, according to all these well-researched and supported legal theories, the federal government has no power to prevent logging, mining, drilling for oil and gas, or drilling for water in national parks and national forests.
Idiot.....of course they do. On every square mile of land the US Constitution allows them (or the States sell to them). The States control the rest, or would under a just government.
Interesting article, but did it have to be written by someone in fifth grade? Can't the Tylers hire some editors with all their HFT profits?
#BuckFarack
Disband the BLM return land to respective states, better yet, open it all up for homesteading! Remember the BLM kills and incarcerates the wild Mustangs! For this, alone, they should pay.
Why are you against the kids Federal lunch programs?
Finally some-won to fink of da shilldren.
"At the very minimum, it became state land – not federal."
Exactly.
The United States can ADMIT a State per Article 4 Section 3 of the Constitution.
But it cannot create one. Pretending to 'create' a State is a contradiction in terms as it would make the word "State" and the word "Territory" essentially interchangeable in that they would be no more than an administrative division of the Federal Government - CLEARLY NOT IN CHARACTER with the Constitution or the founding.
Moreover, per Article 1 Section 8 (2nd to last paragraph) of the Constitution, the Federal Government was given authority to exercise legislative authority only over land ceded by a State.
So, if a State didn't cede the land, then the Feds can have no control over it... That is, if we're talking about the United States government - and not some entirely other government using the same name.
Futhermore - from that date onwards the Feds seized all the land in all new states. In those later cases there was no authority at all to universally seize all the land that isnt currently being worked.
I hope that the hundreds of American citizens that were officially labeled "domestic terrorists" band to gether again in a class action, and sue "Senate Majority Leader" Harry Reid as an individual. Put that self-enriching profoundly corrupt rat fuck out of business.
The Bundy "stand-off" (aside from a publicity black eye) was a HUGE boon to the .gov. they will be wargaming this situation for the next time it happens.....improving reactions, communications, PR tactics, crowd management, etc. They will have much improved tactics for blocking sympathetic citizens, management of the press and so on, next time. What would you bet that ALL of the "terraists" were photographed, all cars logged into a database, all calls recorded, and for good measure there will be tons of IRS audits for these folks PDQ. Gauranteed the .gov will make lemonade out of these lemons. Remember, while our military is well practiced, the internal agencies are not. Well, they just got a new lesson to learn from.