http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/eyewitne...h-his-hands-up/

Someone who was actually there...you can see McConnell's account on video there.

Fish on...

Todd

Yes, I do think you support them.

I also think you don't mind cherry picking all the accounts to find the one that makes BTG an innocent victim of government tyrrany.

I also think all of them should do hard time in a federal prison.

Fish on...

Todd

i think the government is fvcked up....

period...

I don't think Frank supports them.....But I think he is sympathetic of their motives..

Is it fair to say that you do not support their actions, however you do support their cause ? When Todd says these guys need to be held accountable for their actions and serve jail time for the unlawful b.s that has taken place....You seemingly are opposing those ideas and pretty much everything he has to say

Hamster doesn't support them, but he just can't help but fag out every thread with his dumbfuckery.

It's because he's a fuckin' donkus.

Classic Dan, low blow but a beauty!!

Fox's Lou Dobbs is reporting the Hammonds convictions are a act of governmental injustice.
So who pushed for mandatory sentencing?
I swear these fuckos have no memory what so ever.

Well,,,, that pretty much sums it up.

way to suck some serious arse.

A fly over by an AT-10 Wart Hog should clean things up.

Funny how the ones that suck the government's [Bleeeeep!] for every last doughnut break, sick day, holiday, pension, and dollar are the ones defending their cash cow.

The Government is screwed up.

America needs change.

Don't set fires on property that's not yours, don't go to jail. Instances of inbred hillbillies operating under their own interpretation the law don't usually end well.

Extenuating circumstances or an sympathetic judge has no effect at all on mandatory minimum sentencing...that's the "mandatory" part.

Fish on...

Todd

It wasn't extenuating circumstances or sympathy. In the judges opinion, it would be cruel and unusual punishment to apply a mandatory minimum from a terrorism statute to a non terrorist brush fire. Mandatory minimums are just a statute and do not Trump common law or the Constitution.

The feds are just trying to get the ranchers off the land to use their environmental impacts for Chinese companies to build solar power plants and funnel money to Harry Reid and Obama's cronies as corporate welfare for politically correct green power industry. My tariff on China will force American companies to build any power plants and the socialists and their cronies won't be able to skim off the top. Plus without the corporate welfare tax credits the green power industry gets and without government help in forcing ranchers off their land, these solar plants would have to pay their true costs and not externalize these costs to the public, so they most likely will never be built.

At minimum, even you'd have to agree that the charges against the Hammonds were Trumped up.

Easily diagnosed as Rancher Jealousy Syndrome.

206ers have no immunity to it.

There is ZERO discretion in this situation...mandatory sentences were put there precisely to remove any discretion, that's why they are such stupid things...but they are there, and they are the law.

They got a trial by jury, as required by the Constitution (the real one, not the abridged/annotated one written by a Church elder that those idiots are carrying around), and they were found guilty.

The law provides a mandatory sentence...no discretion.

There is absolutely no further discussion required...that's the law.

Fish on...

Todd

And why did the Government win?

Hint: Because there is no discretion.

Fish on...

Todd

The squeaky wheel got the grease.

Did one of you once practice law?

If so I'm going with the one that didn't on this one because our system is corrupt and F'ed up.