-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Trump pardons Oregon men whose case sparked wildlife refuge takeover
- Thread starter janusff
- Start date
More like the other way around, Ubisoft didn't come up with that villain in a vacuum.
This cockstain "represents" my district. Unfortunately his seat is pretty safe, but I look forward to voting against his bitch ass regardless.
Rep. Greg Walden (R) from Oregon gains a lot from this, and he's the one that asked Trump to do it.
I'd be legit fascinated by what he'd use as an excuse for such an action.
Look past the point and Cape harder please.
I wouldn't care what he would have to say. Burn it all.
What's scaring me is seeing that post and knowing its possible
cape for what? calling them "radicalized right wing terrorists" seems like a hell of a stretch to me, these two men were not the ones who occupied the wildlife refuge. It's like people are conflating the two cases.
Yes, this thread is strange.
Waiting for someone to get confused about what the acronym "BLM" stands for again, though!
I hate to tell you this, but Cliven Bundy and merry band of thugs already got cleared of all charges earlier in 2018 and have already gone back to being holed up in their ranch and sucking on the gubment tit for half a year now with the feds' definite chance to nail these guys pretty much permanently gone now. The thing was judged a mistrial in the end.
I don't blame you for not knowing though. In the pre-Trump era, this would have been national news for weeks. With #45 hogging all the spotlight all the time, things like these fall by the wayside. Though in this case that might have been a good thing, because critics were rightfully worried that this would send a message that what Bundy and his family did was ah-okay and more people (preferably white ones) should try and stage a local rebellion against government troops because of course you'll get away with it in the end. So I'm kinda okay with it not having been given lots of time in the spotlight.
I think people are conflating two different events here while (although somewhat related) the men pardoned had no direct involvement in the occupation.
There's the occupation of the wildlife refuge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Malheur_National_Wildlife_Refuge
According to that case the men were charged in 2012 for two fires in 2001 and 2006. Knowing they would face the statutory minimum of 5 years they waived their right to appeal in exchange for dismissal of several other unresolved charges and were sentenced to a few months in jail. They served their sentence and were released but in 2015...
Hence why they were in jail again. So yeah, they served their original sentence then were re-sentenced again several years later to serve a total of 5 years.
There's the occupation of the wildlife refuge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Malheur_National_Wildlife_Refuge
Then the arson case these two were convicted for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammond_arson_case
According to that case the men were charged in 2012 for two fires in 2001 and 2006. Knowing they would face the statutory minimum of 5 years they waived their right to appeal in exchange for dismissal of several other unresolved charges and were sentenced to a few months in jail. They served their sentence and were released but in 2015...
Hence why they were in jail again. So yeah, they served their original sentence then were re-sentenced again several years later to serve a total of 5 years.
Last edited:
People seem confused. these arent the actual terrorists who held up the refuge, these are guys that inspired them. They lit protective fires originally, which there's certainly an argument there that they shouldn't have done that, especially on federal land (an argument that holds up so well they were sentenced for it).
I think the big contention with it is that they recieved a weirdo sentence less than the mandatory minimum, I believe as a plea? Then after serving it, the court decided, "nah, nvm lol, yall get the minimum sentence". On that alone I could understand the pardon....
but I completely understand and would expect trump to pardon the terrorists except...
They all mostly got slapped on the wrist. We're talking a shit ton of tiny fines and a handful of multi-year sentences, a lot of jury acquittals too. Fucking insane, I don't think any of them got anything close to even the minimum arsonist sentence.
This is one stupid fucking country.
I think the big contention with it is that they recieved a weirdo sentence less than the mandatory minimum, I believe as a plea? Then after serving it, the court decided, "nah, nvm lol, yall get the minimum sentence". On that alone I could understand the pardon....
but I completely understand and would expect trump to pardon the terrorists except...
They all mostly got slapped on the wrist. We're talking a shit ton of tiny fines and a handful of multi-year sentences, a lot of jury acquittals too. Fucking insane, I don't think any of them got anything close to even the minimum arsonist sentence.
This is one stupid fucking country.
Yeah, that's the weird part. I don't know a ton about the occupation and just started reading up on it after seeing this. I was expecting harsher sentences for armed militants who forcefully took over a National Wildlife Refuge but most of them got off extremely light!
As for these two...they had already voluntarily reported to prison when the occupation went down and (like I said above) were not directly involved nor wanted any part of it. They told Bundy they didn't want his help and their lawyer released a statement stating that the group lead by Bundy did not speak for the Hammonds. It seems Bundy basically co-opted their case and used it as an excuse to proceed with the occupation.
Do they deserve a pardon? I'm not 100 percent sure, I haven't delved too deeply into the case but I can definitely understand and have no real problems with it. They waived their rights to appeal in exchange for the dropping of some charges and a lighter sentence. They served their time and were released. Imagine doing that and then getting notice from the court system several years later basically saying, "changed our mind, report back to jail for 4.5 years". As of now they've already served most of their sentence (3 and 4 years respectively). Even if they had been sentenced to the minimum at their original sentencing they would have been released a year or two ago.
I don't think these guys are terrorists and I think many people in this thread are mistaking these guys for those who lead or actively took part in the occupation.
Last edited:
Yo don't put this kind of evil on Luther. Even that psychotic bastard would probably want to curb stomp half of Trump's idiot squad.
These seem like rational people to me... this is the dude who got shot during all of this.
Someone slap the Far Cry logo on this
edit: beaten badly, lol
Oh, okay then, that's just fine. That's just normal these days.
It's good people were so adamant that pardoning these people isn't a big deal.
Jesus Christ.
Making himself rich and murdering millions of people is his MO though.
Why is the Law&Order president pardonning terrorists who shot on the police?
Because they are white?
