Wiki listed several high ranking supporters of Bundy’s position.
You can object their inclusion.
I’ll miss you. 
I use the quotes because they are militia only in the loosest possible sense. They are better described as “armed irregulars” if we want to be nice. What they call themselves is of no importance as groups of anti-government cranks have a history of giving themselves misleading and inaccurate names.
What you haven’t mentioned is on what charge?
As far as I can tell there are no warrants on him.
A judge could place a contempt of court charge on him for not paying civil penalties.
If anywhere else against anyone else any police force kicked in doors with SWAT teams on no knock warrants for only contempt of court charges and not paying fines most on this board would be outraged. And no I don’t think the risk of someone losing their life would be minimal.
I don’t like how this played out. I think he is a sovereign citizen nut job. But I don’t think it is something anyone should be killed over. The Feds handled it in the least worst way.
Your usage is antiquated, then. The media has had no qualms about referring to them as militias, sans scare quotes.
[QUOTE=Fox frickin News]
Members of a Utah **militia **arrived at the ranch Wednesday, and other **militias **from Texas, New Hampshire and Florida are reportedly set to arrive in the coming days.
[/QUOTE]
Is threatening to shoot people not a crime these days?
Why would someone put pressure on the Feds in Bundy’s favor without publicizing it? If they really did support Bundy’s position they would make it public to gain favor with like-minded whackos (otherwise the pressure is pointless). The only reason I can come up with is that publicly pressuring the Feds is politically embarrassing. The only rationale that makes sense to me is that the Feds are trying to avoid another Waco.
Did Bundy himself threaten to shoot anyone?
The godfather always maintains plausible deniability.
Yes exactly the point. Although I think you give him too much credit.
Those that did point their weapons towards federal agents were investigated. They decided not to charge. I don’t know, maybe with the videos available they couldn’t prove that they were aiming directly at anyone. Maybe they chose to not charge for political reasons. Whatever the reason it is separate from what Bundy could be charged with which as far as I can tell is at most contempt of a judicial order. Maybe I’m missing something.
There are thousands of unpublicized people across the country right now who have not paid fines and have warrants out for the arrest for contempt of a judicial order. Should SWAT be used to kick in their doors?
I don’t think you are. I don’t necessarily think Bundy should be arrested, but his assets should most definitely be seized per the legal court order.
I think it’s a little cheeky to compare Bundy to someone with unpaid parking tickets.
As I’ve stated, I’m not sure what the good option is. I don’t think 12 months of inactivity means the government is dropping the issue, and I definitely don’t think they should. I’d like to see a message sent that armed insurrection will not be tolerated, but I’d like it to happen without bloodshed. The government is in a shitty pickle because of the indefensible actions of a bunch of assholes.
Or $20,000 in unpaid child support. Or unpaid civil judgements. Or unpaid criminal fines. The concept is exactly the same. The scale shifts. But there are some that owe as much or more than Bundy.
And no I don’t have a good solution either. I wish I did.
Did those people have their assets seized and then get them back due to an armed standoff?
You can argue that Bundy was no different from those people in March of 2014. Not so much 6 weeks later.
The legal issues are as settled as can be. Only the political issues remain up in the air.
No. As has been explained several times, the feds are afraid of the blowback when they march in to arrest Bundy or seize his cattle and the “militia” start shooting (and are all killed.) It’s Ruby Ridge III.
I’m very glad nobody has been killed. I’m very unhappy that somebody has been able to ignore the rule of law with no repercussions because he has a bunch of fuckwit militia friends.
As far as I can tell, there are no “militia” at the Bundy ranch at this point. Some of them left after they became convinced they were targeted for a drone strike. Their departure led to a schism with other irregulars accusing the leader of cowardice. By June of last year, they were down to only 8 or so armed cranks on site. Nothing recent mentions there being any left at all now. Bundy and his family could conceivably decide to shoot it out with arresting officers, but the “militia” is no longer a factor.
The legal issues were settled after the judge ruled in 1st case. Except that it wasn’t. It could also be said that the legal issues were settled after the judge ruled in the 2nd case. After the 3rd ruling, I’m seeing a pattern here.
Shouldn’t we now be able to graze our Really Not All That Bright doorhinge cattle (maybe you can think of a branding iron for that brand?) on BLM land? The court rulings seem to be un-servable.
Why don’t they freeze his bank accounts?
I don’t personally have too much of a problem with the way the Feds handled it, if it were consistent with how law enforcement always responds to people who are uncooperative but not actually violent. Except, it isn’t. Bundy has money, and maybe some political connections, so he gets handled with kid gloves and eventually allowed to walk a free man. Take away the money (and the maybe-connections), and would the cops have been nearly as circumspect in dealing with him?
Politically he is much different. Criminally he is not.
You talk about law enforcement like it is some monolithic institution. In this particular case we are talking about multiple layers of federal agencies. Starting with the the Bureau of Land Management who’s primary focus is not law enforcement. This was primarily a civil case until last year. I can’t think of any comparable cases to look at to see if it was treated much differently.
Cows on the range aren’t much use. They’re only useful when you sell them to somebody.
Snag the money from his bank account(s). Just intercept the payment from the feedlot or slaughterhouse or whoever he eventually sells to.
Right now the Feds are paying chess, while **steronz ** (among others here & out there) seems to want whack-a-mole. The Feds may not be playing *excellent *chess, but they are trying to think beyond the simple action reaction paradigm. Execute a hoped-for peaceful grab of Bundy; a bunch of whackos will escalate it and then die as martyrs to their cause, causing a hundred more Bundy’s to spring up. That’s a worse outcome than the status quo.
So its smarter for the Feds to do what they’re doing. He’s effectively surrounded, logically if not physically, and the Feds can be patient for years if need be.
As I said back on page 1, this is even more of a no-win for a Democratic administration than it is for a Republican one. If Bundy wants to press the point, the next year and a half is his time to do it. President Cruz or whoever will have no real issues squashing him like the bug he is.
Aside:
For folks who don’t live in NV & AZ and to a lesser extent CO & UT, it’s tough to understand the relationship between the people, the state government, & the federal government. It’s very different than what Midwesterners or easterners are used to. And most of the difference is driven by the vast amounts of land that belong to a generally unresponsive bureaucracy in DC rather than to the local political & economic process.
Bundy is a hard core crank. But there’s a kernel of truth in the middle of his mountain of BS that resonates with a lot of otherwise completely sensible rural and suburban folks out there. And with the politicians they elect.
Do you have a cite for that? I’ve not seen anything about a decision not to charge anyone; where did you get this info?
I don’t know but he should be. The bastard. At the very least I wish the Feds would do that one thing that somebody else posted: place a lien on his property. But somebody else expressed the very sentiment about that whole deal that I have: that it appeared to show that if an anti-government scofflaw has enough of his gun-totin’ “friends” show up that the Feds will cave. I don’t like that. I don’t like that one bit.