Texas Attorney General Gregg Abott forgets about the 5th amendment.

[C_Felix]

http://youngcons.com/texas-attorney...e-it-flag-so-the-feds-will-stay-out-of-texas/

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said, “I am about ready to go to the Red River and raise a ‘Come and Take It’ flag to tell the feds to stay out of Texas.”

So, yeah...5th Amendment.

 

[tyr_13]

http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/fo/Oklahoma_Field_Office/ofo_planning/okt_rmp/blm_red_river_statement.html

Another made-up controversy from a few paranoid conservatives.

 

[applecorped]

http://www.blm.gov/nm/st/en/fo/Oklahoma_Field_Office/ofo_planning/okt_rmp/blm_red_river_statement.html

Another made-up controversy.

Agreed.

 

[theprestige]

http://youngcons.com/texas-attorney...e-it-flag-so-the-feds-will-stay-out-of-texas/


So, yeah...5th Amendment.

Rhetoric aside, the AG seems to be making the following reasonable requests of the Federal Bureau of Land Management, over its claim of jurisdiction of some land along the Red River:

Please delineate with specificity each of the steps for the RMP/EIS process for property along the Red River.

Please describe the procedural due process the BLM will afford to Texans whose property may be claimed by the federal government.

Please confirm whether the BLM agrees that, from 1923 until the ratification of the Red River Boundary Compact, the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma was the gradient line of the south bank of the Red River. To the extent the BLM does not agree, please provide legal analysis supporting the BLM’s position.

Please confirm whether the BLM still considers Congress’ ratification of the Red River Boundary Compact as determinative of its interest in land along the Red River? To the extent the BLM does not agree, please provide legal analysis supporting the BLM’s new position.

Please delineate with specificity the amount of Texas territory that would be impacted by the BLM’s decision to claim this private land as the property of the federal government.

The 5th Amendment covers a lot of ground, from grand jury indictments for felonies to proper application of eminent domain. What part of the Amendment do you believe is relevant here?

 

[C_Felix]

I'm pretty much going with ED here.

Yes, the questions are valid, and I'm sure (and assuming) that if this were true, the Feds would go about "taking" this land in a legal manner.

 

[FenerFan]

http://youngcons.com/texas-attorney...e-it-flag-so-the-feds-will-stay-out-of-texas/


So, yeah...5th Amendment.

I like the banner for that website. I think that during their "fight for freedom" some confusing yet undeniable feelings began to stir deep within Bruce and Gary.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I like the banner for that website. I think that during their "fight for freedom" some confusing yet undeniable feelings began to stir deep within Bruce and Gary.

Actually, their names are Josh and David. From their website:

Young Conservatives was founded in May 2009 by Josh and David during their first year at Dartmouth College. These two friends, Ivy League students, college basketball players, lovers and editors of The Dartmouth Review created Christian and conservative music videos that went viral on YouTube.​

I always forget those comma usage rules, but I'm pretty sure they just both love the Dartmouth Review, right?

Or maybe I added the underlined. That could have happened, too.

 

[Darth Rotor]

My brother went to Dartmouth. Played on the Rugby team. There was a famous rugby song about the Freshmen / Sophomores / Juniors at Yale getting no tail. Perhaps Josh and David were really Elis at heart.

As to the Texas AG: part of the battle in politics is rhetoric. I won't say I'm pleased with his taking a page from Rick Perry's "secede" line of rubbish. Oh well, it gets attention to a particular issue.