Armed Conk militia group occupies Malheur NWR offices

[kalm]

Once again, another swing and a miss. Most liberals are against mandatory sentencing guidelines, including the two ranchers involved. There had been a lot of discussion about this on progressive sites.

Of course, the opposite is true - all these "Law and Order" types are finally catching on to what progressives have been saying for decades

You and klam, as usual, miss the point.

Liberals made this about the Bundys (and so did the Bundys themselves)

And no, it does NOT appear that liberals have any concern over Federal sentencing guidelines when they don't affect minorities. In fact, this very incident demonstrates that quite well.

Unless you meant to say "Libertarians"... then you'd be correct.

My first sentence in this thread:

I don't like mandatory minimums or hate/terrorism provisions in sentencing. Like everyone else, I also hate bureaucrats. The 5 years seems excessive...if the Hammonds weren't such colossal and destructive douchebags.

As Jon and I both pointed out, similar statements about this situation were made by many liberals. Perhaps you're not checking out the same liberal sources.

And WTF do you mean "liberals made this about the Bundy's?"

It's about freedom...and self reliance...and snacks.

[Wedgebuster]

Chicken shits didn't have the balls to go out in a blaze of glory, even after all the gun waving and acting like mercenaries.

[dbackjon]

Once again, another swing and a miss. Most liberals are against mandatory sentencing guidelines, including the two ranchers involved. There had been a lot of discussion about this on progressive sites.

Of course, the opposite is true - all these "Law and Order" types are finally catching on to what progressives have been saying for decades

You and klam, as usual, miss the point.

Liberals made this about the Bundys (and so did the Bundys themselves)

And no, it does NOT appear that liberals have any concern over Federal sentencing guidelines when they don't affect minorities. In fact, this very incident demonstrates that quite well.

Unless you meant to say "Libertarians"... then you'd be correct.

Again, you are swinging and missing. A number of liberals (including) did point out that minimum mandatory sentencing was wrong, and TRIED to get the right engaged on this.

I am sorry that you are incapable of accepting this fact, or that most progressives had multiple concerns on this:

1) Mandatory sentencing (although for the arson, destruction of property, etc, the sentence was not out of line)
2) The Land-Grab Movement that some ranchers/mining companies, and other exploitive companies are trying to do to OUR land in the West, privatizing it, aided and abetted by the GOP.
3) The traitorous nature of the militia groups that are a far greater danger to the US than foreign terrorists.

[dbackjon]

You and klam, as usual, miss the point.

Liberals made this about the Bundys (and so did the Bundys themselves)

And no, it does NOT appear that liberals have any concern over Federal sentencing guidelines when they don't affect minorities. In fact, this very incident demonstrates that quite well.

Unless you meant to say "Libertarians"... then you'd be correct.

My first sentence in this thread:

I don't like mandatory minimums or hate/terrorism provisions in sentencing. Like everyone else, I also hate bureaucrats. The 5 years seems excessive...if the Hammonds weren't such colossal and destructive douchebags.

As Jon and I both pointed out, similar statements about this situation were made by many liberals. Perhaps you're not checking out the same liberal sources.

And WTF do you mean "liberals made this about the Bundy's?"

It's about freedom...and self reliance...and snacks.

As usual, CID is getting his ass handed to him, but like Ben Carson, can't admit defeat.

[kalm]

My first sentence in this thread:



As Jon and I both pointed out, similar statements about this situation were made by many liberals. Perhaps you're not checking out the same liberal sources.

And WTF do you mean "liberals made this about the Bundy's?"

It's about freedom...and self reliance...and snacks.

As usual, CID is getting his ass handed to him, but like Ben Carson, can't admit defeat.

CID will come back with "an awe shucks just trolling you guys" reply.

[CID1990]

As usual, CID is getting his ass handed to him, but like Ben Carson, can't admit defeat.

CID will come back with "an awe shucks just trolling you guys" reply.

Negative

Please continue to tell me about the plurality of liberals spilling ink over the travesty of unfair sentencing as it pertains to inbred white ranchers.

In spite of what you may hear in the echo chamber, Jon and you and two or three liberal columnists do not make a movement- the vast majority of the flack over this is about the Bundys and nothing more.

[kalm]

CID will come back with "an awe shucks just trolling you guys" reply.

Negative

Please continue to tell me about the plurality of liberals spilling ink over the travesty of unfair sentencing as it pertains to inbred white ranchers.

In spite of what you may hear in the echo chamber, Jon and you and two or three liberal columnists do not make a movement- the vast majority of the flack over this is about the Bundys and nothing more.

Ah. So you're contention is that sentencing laws are a bigger story here than the militia movement?

Yes, I can see why you'd think that.

[GannonFan]

Negative

Please continue to tell me about the plurality of liberals spilling ink over the travesty of unfair sentencing as it pertains to inbred white ranchers.

In spite of what you may hear in the echo chamber, Jon and you and two or three liberal columnists do not make a movement- the vast majority of the flack over this is about the Bundys and nothing more.

Ah. So you're contention is that sentencing laws are a bigger story here than the militia movement?

Yes, I can see why you'd think that.

Is the militia movement really a big story in any context? Even if it's a few hundred white guys with guns, given the wide expanse of space you guys say is out west is that even a problem? Maybe we should let these yokels take over a cabin at some national park - then when we Easterner's come out in the summer on vacation we could know where to go to gawk at them. That would take up at least an hour or two.

[CID1990]

Negative

Please continue to tell me about the plurality of liberals spilling ink over the travesty of unfair sentencing as it pertains to inbred white ranchers.

In spite of what you may hear in the echo chamber, Jon and you and two or three liberal columnists do not make a movement- the vast majority of the flack over this is about the Bundys and nothing more.

Ah. So you're contention is that sentencing laws are a bigger story here than the militia movement?

Yes, I can see why you'd think that.

I think it is a bigger story than a bunch of backwards Mormons holing up in a vacant shack, yes.

I don't read much Rolling Stone or Huffpo so I'm not up to date on the existential threat that is the militia movement

[AZGrizFan]

Ah. So you're contention is that sentencing laws are a bigger story here than the militia movement?

Yes, I can see why you'd think that.

Is the militia movement really a big story in any context? Even if it's a few hundred white guys with guns, given the wide expanse of space you guys say is out west is that even a problem? Maybe we should let these yokels take over a cabin at some national park - then when we Easterner's come out in the summer on vacation we could know where to go to gawk at them. That would take up at least an hour or two.

That was my suggestion all along. We had all 150 of these fuckers in one place. Put up a damned fence and charge admission.

[kalm]

Ah. So you're contention is that sentencing laws are a bigger story here than the militia movement?

Yes, I can see why you'd think that.

I think it is a bigger story than a bunch of backwards Mormons holing up in a vacant shack, yes.

I don't read much Rolling Stone or Huffpo so I'm not up to date on the existential threat that is the militia movement

In the big picture it is. The perceived threat of these guys drives the story less than the hilarious failure they are as freedom loving patriots and the delicious hypocrisy of it being a right wing movement.

That's what upsets you.

[CID1990]

I think it is a bigger story than a bunch of backwards Mormons holing up in a vacant shack, yes.

I don't read much Rolling Stone or Huffpo so I'm not up to date on the existential threat that is the militia movement

In the big picture it is. The perceived threat of these guys drives the story less than the hilarious failure they are as freedom loving patriots and the delicious hypocrisy of it being a right wing movement.

That's what upsets you.

I don't think you even know what reservation you've gone off of on that one

I don't care about the militia movement and I never have.

That they happen to have highlighted an issue that I do care about seems to be confusing you

The only people who seem to be upset at hypocrisy are you and Jon when I suggest that liberals' priorities aren't exactly as pure as the wind driven snow

Unless I misinterpreted you two falling all over each other to respond to me

[kalm]

In the big picture it is. The perceived threat of these guys drives the story less than the hilarious failure they are as freedom loving patriots and the delicious hypocrisy of it being a right wing movement.

That's what upsets you.

I don't think you even know what reservation you've gone off of on that one

I don't care about the militia movement and I never have.

That they happen to have highlighted an issue that I do care about seems to be confusing you

The only people who seem to be upset at hypocrisy are you and Jon when I suggest that liberals' priorities aren't exactly as pure as the wind driven snow

Unless I misinterpreted you two falling all over each other to respond to me

When this thing first started, every freedom loving conk in the country had it move just a little over the prospect of the Bundy's expanding their rebellion against the evil big government to a new front. Then the militia dudes kept talking and...snacks...and dildos happened. The Hammond's crushed the crusade further when their lawyer said thanks, but we actually don't need your help.

But I've been impressed all along by yours and the right's concern about over-reach on sentencing. You guys have been championing that cause hard for years.

[houndawg]

I don't think you even know what reservation you've gone off of on that one

I don't care about the militia movement and I never have.

That they happen to have highlighted an issue that I do care about seems to be confusing you

The only people who seem to be upset at hypocrisy are you and Jon when I suggest that liberals' priorities aren't exactly as pure as the wind driven snow

Unless I misinterpreted you two falling all over each other to respond to me

When this thing first started, every freedom loving conk in the country had it move just a little over the prospect of the Bundy's expanding their rebellion against the evil big government to a new front. Then the militia dudes kept talking and...snacks...and dildos happened. The Hammond's crushed the crusade further when their lawyer said thanks, but we actually don't need your help.

But I've been impressed all along by yours and the right's concern about over-reach on sentencing. You guys have been championing that cause hard for years.

I recall how they urged us to understand the difference between crack cocaine and powder cocaine and why crack required much harsher sentencing.

[Baldy]

When this thing first started, every freedom loving conk in the country had it move just a little over the prospect of the Bundy's expanding their rebellion against the evil big government to a new front.

Yeah, and every super delegate Hillary picks up makes it move just a little for kalm.

Just because Rolling Stone, The Atlantic ( ), and HuffPoo say so doesn't make it true. Who the fuck is even making this a topic of discussion except the left-wing media?

[kalm]

When this thing first started, every freedom loving conk in the country had it move just a little over the prospect of the Bundy's expanding their rebellion against the evil big government to a new front.

Yeah, and every super delegate Hillary picks up makes it move just a little for kalm.

Just because Rolling Stone, The Atlantic ( ), and HuffPoo say so doesn't make it true. Who the fuck is even making this a topic of discussion except the left-wing media?

Weak.

I read a two articles from Reason Magazine (Gillespie and Welch) and one from Breitbart this morning.

[CAA Flagship]

Yeah, and every super delegate Hillary picks up makes it move just a little for kalm.

Just because Rolling Stone, The Atlantic ( ), and HuffPoo say so doesn't make it true. Who the fuck is even making this a topic of discussion except the left-wing media?

Weak.

I read a two articles from Reason Magazine (Gillespie and Welch) and one from Breitbart this morning.

[kalm]

Weak.

I read a two articles from Reason Magazine (Gillespie and Welch) and one from Breitbart this morning.

I forgot "da".

It's Italian, bitch!

[CAA Flagship]

I forgot "da".

It's Italian, bitch!

fuhgeddaboudit

[CID1990]

I don't think you even know what reservation you've gone off of on that one

I don't care about the militia movement and I never have.

That they happen to have highlighted an issue that I do care about seems to be confusing you

The only people who seem to be upset at hypocrisy are you and Jon when I suggest that liberals' priorities aren't exactly as pure as the wind driven snow

Unless I misinterpreted you two falling all over each other to respond to me

When this thing first started, every freedom loving conk in the country had it move just a little over the prospect of the Bundy's expanding their rebellion against the evil big government to a new front. Then the militia dudes kept talking and...snacks...and dildos happened. The Hammond's crushed the crusade further when their lawyer said thanks, but we actually don't need your help.

But I've been impressed all along by yours and the right's concern about over-reach on sentencing. You guys have been championing that cause hard for years.

I have always been against both sentencing guidelines as well as the war on drugs and have said as much here numerous times, Mr. "You People" Thoughtful Moderate

Please continue inventing for the sake of your argument, whatever it is

[kalm]

When this thing first started, every freedom loving conk in the country had it move just a little over the prospect of the Bundy's expanding their rebellion against the evil big government to a new front. Then the militia dudes kept talking and...snacks...and dildos happened. The Hammond's crushed the crusade further when their lawyer said thanks, but we actually don't need your help.

But I've been impressed all along by yours and the right's concern about over-reach on sentencing. You guys have been championing that cause hard for years.

I have always been against both sentencing guidelines as well as the war on drugs and have said as much here numerous times, Mr. "You People" Thoughtful Moderate

Hey! Me too! Is it painful that you and I agree on so much?

[Baldy]

Yeah, and every super delegate Hillary picks up makes it move just a little for kalm.

Just because Rolling Stone, The Atlantic ( ), and HuffPoo say so doesn't make it true. Who the fuck is even making this a topic of discussion except the left-wing media?

Weak.

I read a two articles from Reason Magazine (Gillespie and Welch) and one from Breitbart this morning.

A couple of mentions in the Hit & Run Blog with links to the WaPoo, and an article in the February issue comparing Black Lives Matter to Bundy doesn't really count as continuing coverage.

But please...keep trying.

[CID1990]

I have always been against both sentencing guidelines as well as the war on drugs and have said as much here numerous times, Mr. "You People" Thoughtful Moderate

Hey! Me too! Is it painful that you and I agree on so much?

no. But your reading comprehension sometimes is

[BDKJMU]

"FBI agents under investigation for possible misconduct in LaVoy Finicum shooting

BEND – An FBI agent is suspected of lying about firing twice at Robert "LaVoy" Finicium and may have gotten help from four other FBI agents in covering up afterward, authorities revealed Tuesday.

The bullets didn't hit Finicum and didn't contribute to his death, but now all five unnamed agents, part of an elite national unit, are under criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department. Inspector General Michael Horowitz is leading the independent inquiry.

The remarkable disclosure came as a team of local investigators released findings that two state troopers shot Finicium three times in the back during the chaotic scene at a police roadblock Jan. 26. One bullet pierced his heart, an autopsy showed.

A prosecutor ruled the fatal shooting was legally justified, saying state law allows use of deadly force when officers believe a person is about to seriously injure or kill someone. Finicum kept moving his hands toward a pocket that contained a loaded handgun. Although he was shot from behind, Finicum had a trooper in front of him armed with a Taser who was thought to be in danger.

Finicum, 54, an Arizona rancher, was one of the leaders of the Jan. 2 takeover of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns.

Investigators gave no details to explain why the one FBI agent, a member of the Hostage Rescue Team, wouldn't report the two shots. They also didn't indicate what his four colleagues on the team did to warrant investigation other than saying it was related to conduct after the shooting.

"The question of who fired these shots has not been resolved," said Greg Bretzing, special agent in charge of the FBI in Portland. The federal agency is cooperating with the inspector general's investigation, he said at a news conference.

The revelation is certain to inflame suspicions about Finicum's death and shake confidence in the FBI, which came under intense fire for botched handling of violent sieges at Ruby Ridge in Idaho and Waco, Texas.

Some supporters have claimed Finicum was shot while surrendering, that he was unarmed and that he was shot nine times. The sheriff in neighboring Grant County, Glenn Palmer, described the police operation as an "ambush."

Finicum's family said in a statement a month ago that he was "executed in cold blood" and accused police agencies of deliberately misleading the public about what happened...."
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-stando ... s_und.html

[BDKJMU]

I guess one of the FBI HRT memebers "forgot" that he fired his weapon.

Finicum an even bigger martyr now...way to go FBI...