Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !

Barack Obama Made America A Sick, Old Nation

by John Meyers
This month, Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.), lectured Secretary of State John Kerry on America’s need to get tough with the world. McCain said President Teddy Roosevelt bragged that he carried a big stick and spoke softly. McCain’s accusation is that the Administration of President Barack Obama doesn’t carry a big stick; it carries a twig.
The truth is Uncle Sam is too weak, too fat and too whimsical of mind to bother picking up much of anything up and waving it about. We have neither the military nor the political will nor the economic strength we once did. It’s as if America has fallen over a cliff, and President Barack Obama pushed us.
It was Obama that promised so much and then delivered far less. It was Obama when running for President that said he would fundamentally change the Nation. And he has changed the Nation for the worse. Whatever your politics, there is no denying that the United States has less influence today than it had before Roosevelt a century ago.
Obama promised to reduce the debt. Instead, he added $7 trillion in new debt, a figure that grows so quickly the fastest computers in the world are needed to track it. So prolific at spending is Obama that America has accumulated as much additional debt under his leadership as it did during the Nation’s first 227 years.
Obama has a record number of Americans hooked on food stamps. He has played the victim because of his skin color. And he has made millions of American blacks feel like they, too, are victims.
Obama was the celebrity candidate who guaranteed to rebuild America’s middle class. Instead, taxes have gone up, prices have gone up and wages for the average American have fallen 7 percent in five years.
And as bad as things are domestically, they are worse internationally. And the reason is that we are being led by the most destructive President in American history: Obama.
In March, an article in American Thinker stated:
When you have a foreign policy of “leading from behind” you lose the political momentum to advance values.
With Obama, it began with his apology tour to Muslim nations which included his bowing to the Saudi Arabian king, a gesture interpreted in the Islamic world as submission. From that point it spiraled downward.
The Worst, Not The First

The birth, growth and eventual decay of a nation are superficially the same as they are for a man. And make no mistake; America is in a serious state of decline. But it didn’t happen overnight and Obama did not make it happen alone, although he has made America a weaker Nation than it had even been since its inception.
President Lyndon Johnson began pulling down America. (One could argue President Franklin Delano Roosevelt did — except that, in the early 1950s, the United States accounted for more than 50 percent of the world gross domestic product and more than 60 percent of every automobile made.) It seems that, beginning with Johnson and culminating with Obama, the United States has been in a virtual state of collapse regarding its social structure, banking system, stock market and dollar. And for at least two decades, many people have seen it coming.
In November, under the headline “The Consequences Of US Decline,” Al Jazeera America featured a commentary from Immanuel Wallerstein, in which he wrote: “I have long argued that U.S. decline as a hegemonic power began circa 1970, and that a slow decline became a precipitate one during the presidency of George W. Bush.”
Wallerstein went on to say: “The United States, for example, may no longer be able to win wars, but it can unleash enormous damage to itself and others by imprudent actions. Whatever the United States tries to do in the Middle East today, it loses. At present none of the strong actors in the Middle East (and I do mean none) take their cues from the United States any longer.”
Age Takes A Toll

Given my recent health scare last month, I have a clear understanding of physical decline in a way that I was incapable of understanding just two months ago. Now on the downside to 60, I took a heart treadmill test last week. I first took one of these at half my age now. On that treadmill test I weighed less than 200 pounds and could bench-press well over 300 pounds. Today, in addition to having arthritis and asthma, I weigh almost 250 pounds and cannot lift a fraction of what I once did. Frankly, time and inactivity have seen my body go to hell. But here is a fact for the reactionaries, the rich and the vain: In time, their bodies will also go to hell.
But the United States hides its age much better. If you will let me stretch the human analogy one more time, the United States is like people I know who go to personal trainers and get facelifts and body surgeries to remove that unsightly fat. And they take tons of hormones to give them that artificial youth: testosterone, estrogen, human growth hormone or pretty much anything they can get from their quack doctors.
Uncle Sam does the same, and Dr. Barry is the quack who will prescribe any short-term money fix that still gives him the illusion of power and gives the Nation the illusion that all is well — that the United States is still the world’s unchallenged superpower, wielding a big stick, in the Mideast if the Arabs need a whipping or in central Europe in case we need to establish land forces against Russia and President Vladimir Putin.
It’s all a lie.
But as long as the Wizard of Oz’s curtain doesn’t get pulled back, Obama can continue with his grand illusions. So for the immediate future the debt will be monetized by the trillions of dollars, and the stock and bond markets will appear healthy from the outside. That is, until a single crisis rips away the Obama façade and the emperor is seen naked, with America left in a state of atrophy.
Yours in good times and bad,
–John Myers

HHS Moves to Cancel More Insurance Plans To Kill The Insurance Companies

Policies CancelledThe Department of Health and Human Services is proposing a rule that would, if implemented, guarantee that even more Americans who like their health insurance plans cannot keep them.
Fixed indemnity plans, which pay insured customers a set amount towards medical expenses and are often cost-effective relative to more comprehensive health insurance, are popular forms of coverage, and potentially becoming more popular in the wake of Obamacare.
Health insurance industry representatives say that fixed indemnity plans have been attracting more interest as many Americans look for a way to mitigate against the high deductibles applicable to many insurance policies available on the Obamacare exchanges (fixed indemnity plans are not Obamacare-compliant, but they are seen by some consumers as pairing nicely with Obamacare-compliant insurance).
But the HHS rule would effectively ban them, overriding regulation that has up until now been the preserve of state governments. The rule would state that these plans can only be sold to consumers where that consumer also purchases Obamacare-compliant insurance.
It is difficult for fixed indemnity providers to determine definitively whether a given customer carries Obamacare-compliant insurance. The proposed regulation may also conflict with state laws pertaining to fixed indemnity. This uncertainty creates a regulatory nightmare for insurers, threatening to cause insurers to stop offering fixed indemnity coverage altogether, whether consumers like it or not.
“This latest proposed Obamacare regulation, like many before it, isn’t even a remotely plausible interpretation of the statutes that Congress actually passed”, wrote Ed Haislmaier, a senior fellow at Heritage Foundation. “This latest “fix” is worth fighting — both to keep the lifeboats intact during this dangerous voyage and to keep a sound insurance option in place for the long haul.”
Under the proposal, consumers who can afford only fixed indemnity insurance may wind up carrying no insurance at all and simply paying the Obamacare penalty. Consumers could face higher risks of medical cost-related bankruptcy, while a lower number of consumers- especially younger consumers, who may be able to afford fixed indemnity but not an Obamacare-compliant policy- reject entering the insurance marketplace full stop, thus risking driving up insurance costs for existing insured consumers.
It could also mean that hospitals and other health care providers have a harder time recouping costs for treatment, as more patients go “naked,” lacking even the basic coverage that fixed indemnity plans offer, and cause further inflation in health care costs as providers seek to recoup losses from those who can and will pay.

Harry Reid Named as Bribe Recipient

CrookA Utah businessman is rocking both state and national politics after claiming Utah Attorney General John Swallow helped him broker a deal with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to make a federal investigation into his company quietly disappear, the Salt Lake Tribune reports.

Jeremy Johnson was allegedly told that the price would be $600,000, and claims to have made an initial payment of $250,000 when he was slapped with a federal lawsuit. Now he says he wants his money back.

The Salt Lake Tribune points out that Johnson has no way of knowing whether the funds actually made it to Reid, even if he did make a massive payment to Reid’s alleged intermediary.

The Salt Lake Tribune continues, explaining how the bribe supposedly came to be in 2010:

At the time, Johnson was largely known in Utah as a wealthy philanthropist who spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to ferry supplies into Haiti after the devastating 2010 earthquake.

Then, with the FTC investigation continuing, Johnson said Swallow suggested Reid could make problems with regulators go away — for a price.

“I said, ‘OK, what do I need to do?’ He’s like, ‘OK, it costs money,’ ” Johnson said, who claimed Swallow was adamant he make a deal.

“I think he told me, ‘Richard Rawle has a connection with Harry Reid,’ ” Johnson said.

He said Swallow at first wanted $2 million to enlist Reid’s help. But [his company] I Works was no longer profitable and he did not have the money, Johnson said, so they eventually agreed on $300,000 upfront and $300,000 later.

Swallow put Johnson in contact with Rawle, whose company has operations in Nevada…

Rawle, who died of cancer last month, had contributed to Reid’s 2010 re-election bid and later bragged to Johnson that the Nevada Democrat helped him delay new federal payday-loan regulations, Johnson said.

“Richard [Rawle] is traveling to LV tomorrow and will be able to contact this person, who he has a very good relationship with. He needs a brief narrative of what is going on and what you want to happen. I don’t know the cost, but it probably won’t be cheap.”

On Oct. 7, Johnson emailed Rawle, insisting there was “rock solid proof” the FTC allegations against I Works were false. “We will do whatever it take[s] to get Senator Reid on our side and hopefully you can help make it happen. Let me know.”

Johnson spent 96 days in jail and has released a number of emails and statements seemingly corroborating parts of his story. However, Swallow insists that Johnson is making “false and defamatory accusations” and that any role he may have played was merely for lobbying purposes.

“There’s nothing wrong with that,” Swallow stated. “As long as I’m not interfering with a government agency as a government official, there’s nothing wrong with me being involved.”

But Johnson told a judge he’s felt guilty about the situation from the start: “The truth is the worst thing I think I’ve done was I paid money knowing it was going to influence Harry Reid…So I’ve felt all along that I’ve committed bribery of some sort there.”

Though the connection to Reid remains unverified, some are remembering how Reid claimed on the Senate floor that Mitt Romney hadn’t paid his taxes for ten years based on far less evidence.

A Las Vegas Review-Journal blog jokes about how Reid might address the situation, if looking in from the outside:

I have a “source” that says that Harry Reid takes bribes all the time. In fact, if you want anything done out of his office, you must come with a suitcase of cash just to get an audience. That’s how he’s gotten so rich on a senator’s salary. He stashes his money in an offshore bank account. And, as a sidebar for Salt Lake church execs, he hasn’t tithed on that bribe money.

Senator Harry Reid’s office has declined to comment.

Nancy Pelosi’s secret hand in IRS stonewall

Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., invoked “McCarthyism” Thursday to describe a House committee’s vote to hold ex-IRS official Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress for protesting her innocence but then refusing to testify about the IRS targeting of conservative groups.

The congressman went ballistic at a previous hearing, accusing Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., of “un-American” behavior after Issa adjourned because Lerner repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment.

Cummings, in addition, has accused one of the groups targeted by the IRS, Catherine Engelbrecht’s True the Vote, of being racist.

In short, he’s provided plenty of vitriol to create headwinds for the GOP-led committee trying to investigate government wrongdoing.

But that was the job he reportedly was placed there to do by House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Talking Points Memo reported in 2010 that another Democrat, Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., was lined up to be the ranking minority member of the Oversight committee when Democrats got blown out in the 2010 elections and the GOP regained the majority.

Towns surprised everyone when he dropped out of the race for ranking member. But it wasn’t his choice, TPM said, citing two sources close to Towns who said the congressman received a call from Pelosi saying she could not support his candidacy.

Congressional leadership and the White House, according to TPM, wanted the ranking member to be a “bulldog, who can stand toe to toe with incoming chairman,” Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.

That meant Cummings would leapfrog both Towns and Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., the senior Democrat on the committee.

The report, citing the sources, said Cummings had earned broad respect from the caucus for his performance on the committee and had been Pelosi’s favorite from the start.

TPM said placing Cummings in the seat was one way of making sure “that ranking members are on their top game, aggressive with the chairmen.”

‘He ran as an obstructionist’

When he announced his interest in the committee position in December 2010, Cummings released a statement that House Republicans since have interpreted as a declaration he understood his job would be to defend vigorously the Obama administration as Issa proceeded with investigations.

In his statement, Cummings charged Issa “has announced his intention to seek as many as 280 hearings in 2011 alone, in pursuit of obstructing some of the most significant legislative achievements from the 111th Congress and undermining the current Administration.”

To meet this challenge, Cummings was resolute.

“The Democratic Caucus must not cede to the new House Majority that wishes to move our nation backward, and must take every opportunity to defend against partisan attacks and the dismantling of policies that ensure security for hardworking Americans,” he wrote.

In a June 2011 story, the New York Times quoted former House Oversight Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., as praising Cummings for his willingness to oppose Issa.

“He’s exactly the person we need in that spot,” Waxman told the Times. “I think that Congressman Cummings is willing to work with Chairman Issa when he’s doing appropriate oversight. But if he uses his position for political purposes then Elijah Cummings is going to point that out and set the record straight.”

Issa told the Times Cummings “ran for this job saying he was going to go toe-to-toe and 10 feet ahead and stop me.”

“He ran as an obstructionist,” Issa said.

Patience worn thin

The move apparently has borne some fruit for Democrats.

According to Human Events writer John Hayward, “Issa’s patience has long been stretched by Cummings’ shameful antics during these oversight hearings, which we can now view an effort to prevent scrutiny from turning his way.”

See video of Cummings blasting Issa for being “un-American:

Cummings raging against the IRS:

Cummings accusing Englebrecht and True the Vote of being racist:

‘On the same page of history as McCarthy’

Cummings was at it again Thursday, vocally supporting Lerner’s decision to make a statement to the committee investigating the IRS but then refusing to answer any of its questions.

He said while he, too, wanted Lerner’s testimony, “I cannot cast a vote that would place me on the same page of the history books as Senator Joseph McCarthy or the House Un-American Activities Committee. And I do not draw that comparison lightly.”

He accused fellow members of Congress of trying to obtain a criminal conviction “of an American citizen after she professed her innocence before his committee” and then refused to answer questions.

Cummings charged that not since the 1950s and the most controversial hours of the House Un-American Activities had an attempt has been made to hold a witness in contempt for attempting to exert Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

“Today this committee is trying to do something that even Joe McCarthy could not do in the 1950s, something virtually unprecedented. Sixty years ago, Joe McCarthy tried and failed to obtain a criminal conviction of an American citizen after she professed her innocence before his committee and asserted her right not to testify under the Fifth Amendment.”

Cummings was pointing to 195 when McCarthy pushed to hold in contempt for refusing to testify Diantha Hoag, a Westinghouse employee earning $1.71 an hour that McCarthy had accused of being a communist.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., objected strenuously, pointing out that by giving an opening statement, Lerner had waived her right against self-incrimination.

“I counted 17 separate factual assertions by Ms. Lerner. Not those three little sentences that my colleagues like to cite — 17 separate factual assertions,” Gowdy insisted.

“That is a lot of talking for somebody who wants to remain silent! That’s a lot of talking! If you honestly believe that you can make 17 separate factual assertions and still invoke your right to remain silent, then please tell me what waiver is! Please, tell me what constitutes waiver, if saying 17 separate factual things does not!”

Evidence contradicts previous denials

The latest controversy shows how far Cummings has gone to try to stay on point on the issue about which President Obama said there was “not even a smidgen of corruption.”

Wednesday, the committee released evidence Cummings’ staff directly approached the IRS for information about True the Vote, a group with which he has ideological differences.

The evidence was revealed as the Oversight committee considered the case against Lerner, who could face up to five years in prison if she is found guilty of disclosing confidential taxpayer information.

As WND reported, after reviewing confidential information about the case, the House committee voted to send a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder referring Lerner for criminal prosecution for using her position to improperly influence agency action against only conservative organizations.

The committee alleges Lerner impeded official investigations by providing misleading statements. Further, it contends Lerner risked exposing confidential taxpayer information and may already have done so.

The newly exposed internal IRS emails between Lerner and other IRS employees show that House Oversight minority staff, working for Cummings, began contacting the IRS in August 2012 about targeted non-profit applicant True the Vote.

Issa and five subcommittee chairmen asked Cummings to explain his staff’s investigation of True the Vote. And to explain why he said what was happening wasn’t happening.

The Republican lawmakers want to know why the minority hid the efforts of Cummings’ staff from the majority and why the ranking member denied such actions at a February subcommittee hearing.

The IRS handed over on April 2 copies of communications between Cummings staff and IRS officials, only days after Oversight Committee members had taken new IRS Commissioner John Koskinen to task for withholding relevant communications.

The letter to Cummings said: “Although you have previously denied that your staff made inquiries to the IRS about conservative organization True the Vote that may have led to additional agency scrutiny, communication records between your staff and IRS officials – which you did not disclose to Majority Members or staff – indicates otherwise.”

The letter said that as the committee is scheduled “to consider a resolution holding Ms. Lerner, a participant in responding to your communications that you failed to disclose, in contempt of Congress, you have an obligation to fully explain your staff’s undisclosed contacts with the IRS.”



Judge grants temporary injunction against abortion mandate

BY BOB UNRUHjames_dobson
A federal judge in Denver granted an injunction Thursday to a ministry founded by longtime Christian author and broadcaster James Dobson, Family Talk radio, preventing the enforcement of Obamacare’s abortifacient mandate.

His was among more than 100 lawsuits brought by religious ministries, individuals and organizations and companies against Obama’s health-care takeover on the grounds it violates the religious rights of Christians by forcing them to pay for abortion-causing procedures.

When the lawsuit was filed on his behalf in 2013, Dobson, who founded Family Talk in 2010, explained: “We are suing [then-HHS Secretary] Kathleen Sebelius for forcing or trying to force all of us to give abortifacient medications to our employees, and I just absolutely refuse to do it. We’ll close down before I’ll do it.”

The vast majority of the rulings in the lawsuits have favored the Christians, but a federal precedent is expected to be set this year by the U.S. Supreme Court, which accepted for argument a pair of cases.

Oral arguments in the Conestoga Wood and Hobby Lobby cases already have been held.

Word of the injunction was confirmed by the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is handling the Dobson case and dozens of others on the issue.

The Becket Fund also is handling a large number of the cases, including the Hobby Lobby case before the Supreme Court.

The Family Talk ministry was closed for Good Friday, and WND was unable to obtain a reaction immediately.

At the time the case was filed, Dobson issued a statement: “We believe that every human life, from the moment of conception, is sacred and a gift from God, and we cannot cooperate with this immoral mandate without violating our most deeply held religious beliefs.”

The case against Sebelius, the pro-abortion former Kansas governor who held parties for late-term abortionists, was brought by the Alliance Defending Freedom on behalf of Dobson and Family Talk in U.S. District Court in Denver. Sebelius recently announced her resignation, six months after the catastrophic rollout of the Obamacare government website.

Get James Dobson’s classic, “When God Doesn’t Make Sense,” from the WND Superstore.

The Obama administration had demanded that Family Talk’s third-party insurance administrator provide abortion-inducing drugs and devices to Family Talk employees.

Whether the employees want the products is irrelevant under the Obamacare mandate, which requires the provision regardless of the beliefs of the employer and employees.

As a Christian ministry, Family Talk’s self-insured health plan excludes coverage of abortion-inducing drugs and devices. But the complaint notes that if Family Talk does not comply with the mandate’s requirements by May 1, it will be subject to fines up to $36,500 per employee annually.

“The government has put religious employers to a cruel choice: ‘Abandon your religious beliefs or be fined out of existence,’” said ADF lead counsel Matthew Bowman when the case was launched. “Thankfully, the Constitution and other federal laws don’t allow that.”

The Obama administration was asked to provide an exemption for religious employers, but officials defined the exemption so narrowly that workers at Christian colleges, nursing homes, soup kitchens and parachurch ministries are not protected.

“According to the administration, Family Talk is not ‘religious enough’ for an exemption,” said Martin Nussbaum of Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP, who is serving as co-counsel in the lawsuit. “Yet sanctity of life and protecting the unborn have long been core religious convictions for Dr. Dobson and Family Talk.”

Dobson founded Family Talk in March 2010. Its centerpiece is a daily 30-minute radio broadcast, “Dr. James Dobson’s Family Talk,” that seeks to reach young and old with the Judeo-Christian worldview of the family.

The lawsuit charges the government violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the First and Fifth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act.

Dobson said then his ministry “believes in living out the religious convictions we hold to and talk about on the air.”

“As Americans, we should all be free to live according to our faith and to honor God in our work,” he said. “The Constitution protects that freedom so that the government cannot force anyone to act against his or her sincerely held religious beliefs. But the mandate ignores that and leaves us with a choice no American should have to make: comply and abandon your religious freedom, or resist and be fined for your faith.”

The complaint argues “one of the prohibitions of the Ten Commandments (‘thou shalt not murder’) precludes [Family Talk] from facilitating, assisting in, or enabling the coverage of arrangements for payments for drugs that can and do destroy very young human beings in the womb.”

Meanwhile, the Obama administration has exempted “thousands of other organizations” that it favors, the case points out.

Dobson believes “that the termination of the life of a preborn child by, among other means, abortion-inducing drugs and devices, and related education and counseling, including by means of acting after fertilization to prevent the newly formed embryo from implanting into his or her mother’s uterus, is an intrinsic evil and a sin against God for which plaintiffs will be held accountable.”


Liberty Movement Rising

Submitted by Brandon Smith of,

“Freedom had been hunted round the globe; reason was considered as rebellion; and the slavery of fear had made men afraid to think. But such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing.” – Thomas Paine

The label of “fringe” is a common one used by statists, bureaucrats and paid shills in order to marginalize those who would stand against government corruption. The primary assertion being sold is that the “majority” joyously supports the establishment; and the majority, of course, is always right.

The liberty movement, which is a collection of numerous freedom organizations and political activists brought together by a shared philosophical bond, has been accused of “fringe” status for quite some time. With corporatist dominance over the mainstream media for decades backing an elitist machine in Washington and a global banking cartel footing the bill with money created from thin air, any such accusation can be made to seem “real” to those who are unaware.

The problem has always been a matter of physical action giving rise to an acknowledgment of numbers.

We have all heard the old story of the debate within the ancient Roman government over the idea of forcing the slave population to wear distinct armbands so that they could be more easily identified among the regular population. The concept was rejected on the realization that if the slaves were given a visual confirmation of their considerable numbers and strength, they would be encouraged to revolt against the Roman tyrants. That is to say, as long as the slaves felt isolated, they would remain apathetic and powerless. Of course, that was not always the case. Sometimes, a small group would stand up despite their supposed isolation, and the rest of the world, wide-eyed and astonished, would take notice.

The liberty movement has just experienced one of its first great moments of realization and empowerment in Clark County, Nev., and millions of past naysayers have been shell-shocked.

I covered my views in detail on the Bundy Ranch saga in Nevada in my article “Real Americans Are Ready To Snap,” amid the usual choir of disinformation agents and nihilists desperate to convince Web audiences that the liberty movement would do nothing to stop the Bureau of Land Management’s militant assault on Cliven Bundy’s cattle farm. This assault included hundreds of Federal agents, helicopters, contractors hired essentially as cattle rustlers and even teams of snipers.

The statists and socialists were certainly out in force to misrepresent the Bundy issue and frighten anyone who might consider taking a stand for the family. The Southern Poverty Law Center, not surprisingly, was hard at work spreading lies and disinformation about the confrontation in Nevada, painting a picture of fractured patriot groups and militiamen with “little training” going to face unstoppable Federal BLM agents and likely “ending up dead.” The SPLC insinuated that the movement was ineffective and in over its head.

The reality was much the opposite. Liberty groups arrived in droves and were staunchly unified — not by a centralized leadership, but in defense of the basic moral principles outlined in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Sources on the ground at the Bundy ranching operation relayed to me that at least 1,000 activists and militia members arrived over the weekend, with many more on the way. This one event proved certain points:

The liberty movement is not afraid to put itself in harm’s way for the right cause — even if this means facing off against highly armed government thugs.
The liberty movement has the ability to field a response team or even an army anywhere in the country at any time within a couple of days.
The liberty movement has the ability to change the course of events, even to the point of removing Federal agents from a region who are acting in an unConstitutional manner.
The Federal government is not invincible, nor is it unfazed by liberty movement opposition. They worry about our strength and ability.
Over the past weekend, we witnessed the true influence of the liberty movement. As thousands of activists and militia arrived in the area, the BLM finally began to understand what it was facing. The government agency that has been terrorized farming communities throughout the West for years, the agency armed with military-grade weaponry and hundreds of agents, ran away, as freedom fighters descended on the region.

Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval and Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie, two politicians who were deathly silent during the beginning of the Federal incursion on the Bundy ranch, have now suddenly become vocal in defense of Nevada ranchers against the BLM. It’s amazing how “inspired” politicians can become to do the right thing when they see an army of liberty activists marching against tyranny in their own backyard.

Not only was the BLM forced to remove itself from the area, but it was also forced to relinquish all the cattle it had stolen from Bundy over the course of the past week. Here, liberty groups close in on the cattle holding pens of the BLM and take back Bundy’s property.

Statists are indignant and furious over the surrender of the BLM. The same people who boasted that liberty activists would be slaughtered by Fed agents are now frothing at the mouth because they did not get their massacre. Not only that, but the bureaucracy they worship has shown itself to be impotent in the face of Constitutional champions. All I can say is nothing puts a bigger grin on my face than to see statists cry like babies when their delusions of grandeur are trampled on.

This was a major victory for the liberty movement. But let’s be clear; the fight is just beginning.

I suspect that the Bundy event will be spun by news agencies and the government until it is unrecognizable. They will claim that the BLM left not because they were wrong, but because they were trying to keep people safe. They will claim that liberty movement protesters were the aggressors and the poor BLM agents were just trying to do their jobs. They will play the race card as they always do, much like this pathetically lazy and unprofessional article from Slate, which asserts that if the Bundy’s had been black, the Liberty Movement would have never supported them. They will argue the so-called Federal legality of the raid itself, and paint Bundy as a “freeloader” who refuses to pay taxes and who is living off the American people. They will do everything in their power to destroy the image of the victory and soil the name of the Bundy family.

What they don’t seem to understand, though, is that the liberty movement does not care what the Federal government deems “legal” or “illegal.” Our only interest is what is Constitutional and what is moral. The dispute was never about the “legality” of Bundy’s use of the land, which his family used for grazing without interference for generations — until 1993, when the BLM used the absurd endangered species protection racket to put all of his neighbors out of business and threaten his ranch with invasion. Add to this the recently discovered fact that Senator Harry Reid’s former assistant and friend Neil Kornze is now head of the BLM due to Reid’s influence, and the fact that Harry Reid and his family are reaping financial rewards by driving farmers from all over the region where Cliven Bundy’s ranch sits while arranging land deals with Chinese solar companies, and one has to ask, why should Bundy pay any of his hard earned money to the federal government when they are just going to use it to bulldoze his cattle and make Harry Reid more rich?

Disinformation websites like Snopes contend that Reid’s “projects” are not being established anywhere near the Bundy Ranch, yet, one such project has already been launched only 35 miles south of Bundy, and, the BLM has erased a page from its website specifically mentioning the Bundy Ranch and it’s “interference” with Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone Projects, the same projects Harry Reid and his son are heavily involved in.

What is amazing to me is that in light of this information hardcore socialists are still willing to defend Reid and the BLM. My question is, if the BLM is so innocent, then why are they erasing such data from their website at all? What were they trying to hide?

Harry Reid has not responded to the facts behind his financial involvement in the BLM’s attacks on Nevada farmers, except to say that they are “conspiracy theories”. He added when asked about the status of the confrontation:

“Well, it’s not over. We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it’s not over…”

Yes, Harry, it won’t be over until men like you are thrown behind bars.

Note that he says “an American people”; as if he is separate, as if he is referring to all of us as a subservient organism, or servant class. What Reid is saying is, the elites can’t have “an American people” openly exposing their criminality and defying their tyranny, and then just walking away. I’m sorry to break it to Reid, but that is exactly how all of this is going to end.

Statists and bureaucrats like Reid continually attempt to argue this issue from the standpoint of Federal legality, obviously because the Federal government has the legislative and bureaucratic power to make any despicable action legal (at least on paper) if it wishes. However, the liberty movement has no interest whatsoever in Federal interpretations of legal precedence. We are only concerned with what is right. As the old saying goes, when injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty.

The liberty movement also fully understands that the Bundy victory was only one battle at the beginning of a long war.

The BLM may very well be waiting for activists to leave the area before attacking again. And even if that is not the case, tyrannical systems have a way of attempting to make up for signs of weakness by escalating violence during the next siege. That is to say, we should expect the next event involving the BLM or other government agencies to be even more vicious than the Bundy incident. It is simply the natural inclination of totalitarian systems to exaggerate their power when their failings have been exposed.

That said, it should be noted that corrupt leadership often crumbles in the face of steadfast resolve and courage. We have a long way to go before this Nation is once again truly free, but the liberty movement has proven its invaluable worth over the course of the past several days. We arrived at a crossroads, and we are now moving forward in the right direction — without fear and without regret. It is in these moments when history is made — when common men and women thwart the odds, defy the darkness and make good on their beliefs by risking everything in the name of freedom.

Please donate any amount you can to help us try to recover legal costs in defending liberty and the right of free speech !