Press "Enter" to skip to content

Case dismissed … with prejudice

Federal prosecutors, who have made such a botch of everything connected with the Bundy ranch, have lost. Definitively. Humiliatingly. Deservedly. Their case against Cliven, two of his sons, and another man has been dismissed with prejudice following last month’s mistrial. Meaning no re-trial.

Now. Will the feds retreat and accept that this whole woeful business has been overreach (and under-honesty) on their part from the beginning? Or will they find some other way to get revenge on the harmless (but defiant) Mormon rancher and his clan?

I first got this news on NPR this afternoon. To hear them tell it, a dangerous armed militia has just beaten the innocent federal government, putting field agents in endless future danger all over the west. 🙂

Barely a word (beyond the brief utterance, “prosecutorial misconduct”) about how the fedgov provoked, spied, threatened the family with snipers, used insane force to try to steal the Bundys’ cattle, cheerily lied about it all, and even charged the defendants with making false claims — that were actually true.


  1. Myself
    Myself January 8, 2018 4:43 pm

    A very rare case where justice was served, cops and prosecutors get away with this type of crap all the time.

    I wish the best for the Bundy family and hope they can go on with their lives, though I fear there will be payback.

  2. brew
    brew January 8, 2018 4:46 pm

    My favorite meme from the whole affair was “We’re here to save the turtles – with helicopters and snipers”….

  3. Borepatch
    Borepatch January 8, 2018 6:08 pm

    It will be very interesting indeed to see if the BLM and DoJ try something different here. There is a crisis of governmental legitimacy (per Gallup). Having it dismissed with prejudice and then reintroduced is unlikely to turn this around.

    And this doesn’t even address the BLM regulations in light of the Trump administration’s deregulatory policy preference.

    TL;DR: I’d be very surprised indeed is anything more comes from the government on this. There’s no upside for a Fed.Gov bureaucrat there.

  4. fred
    fred January 8, 2018 8:56 pm

    Fantastic news.I had trouble following it today with a bunch of contradictory reporting.This is really good news.

  5. larryarnold
    larryarnold January 8, 2018 10:10 pm

    If the DoJ is smart, it’s time to bury the files somewhere deep and let the whole fiasco fade into obscurity. If it’s really smart there’ll be a Lessons Learned session.

    Yeah. Or they can pull a Capone, and call in the IRS.

  6. fred
    fred January 8, 2018 10:16 pm

    I hope this time Bundy and his son will keep their mouths shut and not go looking for more trouble,but Cliven doesnt strike me as the brightest bulb out there.If he tries any more grandstanding maybe the will finally succeed in killing him.

  7. MamaLiberty
    MamaLiberty January 9, 2018 3:20 am

    Fred, I hope that thousands, millions even, would take this as encouragement to speak up, to take the risk of exposing the crimes of the non-voluntary government at all levels. If we are silent and compliant, they win every time.

  8. Mark Call
    Mark Call January 9, 2018 6:16 am

    So – a connected, corrupt federal judge FINALLY gets it right? Great – but I gotta wonder who finally held her feet to the fire. There’s more to this, somewhere.

  9. rochester_veteran
    rochester_veteran January 9, 2018 6:41 am

    I’m so glad the truth came out exposing the Feds corruption in railroading the Bundys!

  10. Claire
    Claire January 9, 2018 7:03 am

    Borepatch — Interesting analysis you wrote on the Bundys and the Bastille:

    A number of people have rightly pointed out that Mr. Bundy is no Saint, and that legally he doesn’t have a leg to stand on. That’s quite true. It also isn’t the point that is driving events.

    What is driving events is something that would have been well understood by M. Linguet. Mobs do not spontaneously form out of nothing, and the spark that lights the fire may have very little to do with reality. …

    Our Government has no idea what they have awakened, any more than Louis XVI had. So far, it has played out without blood flowing in the streets. I am pessimistic that this will continue for long.

  11. Borepatch
    Borepatch January 9, 2018 8:25 am

    Claire, thanks for the kind words. Dad was a history professor and loved that old saw that history repeats because nobody listened the first time. Or as Yogi Berra said, you can observe a lot just by looking. 😉

  12. fred
    fred January 9, 2018 9:44 am

    ML,Bundy has a giant target on his back.Moving into Oregon to stoke his ego… that got Finicum KILLED.I agree with speaking out,I agree with protesting,we stopped the VN war with that.When you are facing the charges he was facing,moving into another act,armed,was very stupid.

    We can speak out,unarmed,and make changes.Him,armed,is a recipe for being murdered.The feds want him DEAD or in prison for life.Time to let others take the lead,he did what he needed to do.

  13. Claire
    Claire January 9, 2018 10:06 am

    “we stopped the VN war with that”

    It’s become a sort of gospel that protests stopped the Vietnam war. I wish it were true. But the protests began around 1964-65 and reached their peak around 1968. They continued for years after that, but the war didn’t officially end until 1973 and didn’t actually end until the spring of 1975. If that’s effective activism, we’re in big, big trouble. (And of course, we are in big, big trouble.)

    I completely agree that the Bundys provoked the feds and that they and their closest supporters have behaved foolishly. It’s just that the feds have behaved worse — and once again got caught.

  14. rochester_veteran
    rochester_veteran January 9, 2018 11:00 am

    It’s become a sort of gospel that protests stopped the Vietnam war. I wish it were true. But the protests began around 1964-65 and reached their peak around 1968. They continued for years after that, but the war didn’t officially end until 1973 and didn’t actually end until the spring of 1975. If that’s effective activism, we’re in big, big trouble. (And of course, we are in big, big trouble.)

    I was never a war protester. I actually enlisted in the USAF and was on active duty in 1974, so I’m technically a Vietnam Era Veteran, but never served over there. I remember watching Nixon and family leaving by helicopter and flashing the victory signs (what an idiot!) and also the fall of Saigon on the TV in the day room of the barracks. Both were extremely ignominious events for our country!

    At that time, I really didn’t have a strong opinion concerning the Vietnam War, but as I’ve grown older, I mourn the loss of 58,220 people who were mostly of my generation, the baby boomers and what a friggin’ waste of life it was! If do overs were possible for this, I wish we had never entered militarily into Vietnam!

  15. fred
    fred January 9, 2018 12:13 pm

    I marched with my Mom in the streets of Portland Oregon,and the turn outs were amazing.Yes it did take years.Change takes time.If we hadnt protested we would be there to this day.Washington could no longer ignore us,we wanted the boys home,and we got them.Much to the chagrin of Nixon,Kissinger,and the military industrial complex,we beat them all.
    Complete utter waste of lives and fortune.

    The feds? So out of control its ridiculous.And dont forget gray man.He can do a lot to slow em down without really doing anything ‘wrong’,just not cooperating where you dont have to is a huge monkey wrench in their plans.Example…Jury nullification anyone,you betcha!!!

    RV,same story,technically a VN vet,but they were withdrawing when i went in,first volunteer forces.I would never call myself a VN vet,I surely wasnt.By the grace of God,no other reason.

    I got a fair deal.GI Bill for school and home loan,VA care that beats obama law and allowed me to retire a bit early.

  16. Shel
    Shel January 9, 2018 1:15 pm

    I’m not all that critical of Nixon concerning Vietnam. Kennedy was going to get us out and was assassinated for reasons that still, I believe, aren’t totally clear. LBJ took office saying “We never wanted this,” and proceeded to get us into a war over the fake Gulf of Tonkin incident. Nixon was left with the mess. In his book Decent Interval CIA analyst Frank Snepp was extremely critical of his is own agency and the South Vietnamese leadership while he described Nixon as doing the right things for the right reasons and getting the right results considering the mess he inherited. Nixon was able to be ousted because he lied about a simple breaking and entering intended to find out what the political opposition had on the Republicans. Nobody died, a la Clinton for example. And G. Gordon Liddy was the only one who came out of that fiasco with his head up.

Leave a Reply