chemTrailActivist · @chemTrailActivi
25th Apr 2014 from TwitLonger
#randPaul #clivenBundy
The Government and A literal, intentional conspiracy
United States v. Estate of Hage, Nevada rancher
U.S. District Court Judge Robert C. Jones
United States of America vs. Estate of E. Wayne Hage et al 2:07-cv-01154-RCJ-VCF Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
Excerpts
By filing for a public water reserve, the Government in this case sought specifically to transfer to others water rights belonging to the Hages. The Government also explicitly solicited and granted temporary grazing rights to parties who had no preferences under the TGA, such as Mr. Snow, in areas where the Hages had preferences under the TGA. After the filing of this action, the Government sent trespass notices to people who leased or sold cattle to the Hages, notwithstanding the Hages’ admitted and known control over that cattle, in order to pressure other parties not to do business with the Hages, and even to discourage or punish testimony in the present case. For this reason, the Court has held certain government officials in contempt and referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
In summary, government officials, and perhaps also Mr. Snow, entered into a literal, intentional conspiracy to deprive the Hages not only of their permits but also of their vested water rights.
This behavior shocks the conscience of the Court and provides a sufficient basis for a finding of irreparable harm to support the injunction described at the end of this Order.
[....]
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Government is enjoined from issuing trespass or impound notices to Hage or anyone leasing cattle to him where the third party provides evidence of lease or transfer and Hage admits responsibility for that cattle. The Government must request permission from this Court to issue such notices until further notice. Furthermore, without Hage’s consent or this Court’s permission, the Government shall not—after Hage applies for permits as noted, infra, and the BLM and USFS issue them—reduce the permits by more than 25% for any period of time.
Beyond that, the Government’s normal discretion is restricted under
the present injunction.
This structural injunction is required in this extreme case because of the conspiracy noted supra, the history of violations of the Hages’ due process rights in their permits and vested property rights in the use of water, and the obvious continuing animus against Hage by the government officials charged with administering his permits and the government land on which he has water rights.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/218721684/United-States-of-America-vs-Estate-of-E-Wayne-Hage-et-al-2-07-cv-01154-RCJ-VCF-Findings-of-Fact-and-Conclusions-of-Law
+++
“His remarks on race are offensive and I wholeheartedly disagree with him,” Sen. Rand Paul said in a statement Thursday morning.
But it was just Monday night when Paul offered a careful defense of Bundy’s actions to Fox News. Saying that while breaking the law is wrong, the government should rethink it’s business managing grazing land. “I’m for obeying the law and I’m not for a violent outcome,” he said. “But with regard to the general question, should the states have some prerogative in this, I think so.”
[The great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast left-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against Nevada ranchers.]
[Not suggesting he is, but Cliven Bundy would have been the perfect stooge in a "vast left-wing conspiracy" to de-legitimize the "Domestic Terrorists" Harry Reid is always so on about.]
[Rand Paul is right. The states should have some prerogative in the matter at ranch hand.]