Harry Reid Doubles Down: “If They’re Patriots, We’re in Big Trouble”

RELATED: The Bundy Ranch Property Rights Argument No One Is Making

RELATED: WHERES PETA? BLM Murdered Cattle at Bundy Ranch, PROOF!

Harry Reid

After Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called Bundy Ranch supporters “domestic terrorists” earlier this week, on Friday he doubled down.

On KSNV’s What’s Your Point?, Reid had this to say:

“If anyone thinks by any figment of their imagination that what happened up there last week was just people rallying to somebody that was oppressed, 600 people came in armed. They had practiced. They had maneuvered.”

“They knew what they were doing. They set up snipers in strategic locations with sniper rifles. They had assault weapons. They had automatic weapons. And they boasted about the fact that they put women and children, in fact one retired sheriff from Arizona posted he put women and children, so that they would get hit first.”

“If there ever was an example of people who were domestic violent terrorist wannabes, these are the guys, and I think that we should call it that way. We have a situation that is really untoward.”

Notice that its not the federal government whose bad for threatening to murder peaceful protestors, it is the protestors fault for possibly getting shot.

A Fox News interview with Constitutional sheriff Richard Mack is what Reid was in part referring to.

Here is the 22 second sound bite:

Obviously Mack is discussing having women VOLUNTARILY placed at the front lines to act as a deterrent to violence, reasoning that surely the feds wouldn’t shoot them. But if they did, it would illustrate the full injustice and manically nature of the mafia style situation.

The mainstream liberal media has fed the public a steady diet of pro-government propaganda for the last two weeks. Even going as far as to label Cliven Bundy and his supporters dangerous anti-government right wing extremists and domestic terrorists for daring to live by their conscience, and stand up to a thieving government.

The Southern Property Law Center, famous for its far-left radicalism has even tagged Bundy and his supporters as a “threat” in their “Hate Watch blog:

Its literally amazing how many Americans are reacting to this obvious abuse of power by the federal government and their enforcers. Just visit #BundyRanch on twitter  and you will get your fill of unwavering totalitarian support of caging, stealing from, and even physically harming and killing Cliven Bundy and his courageous supporters for daring to make a stand.

Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) objected to Reid’s description of the events in Bunkersville, Nevada, last week at Bundy’s ranch. Heller told What’s Your Point? Hosts Jeff Gillan and Amy Tarkanian, “What Senator Reid may call domestic terrorists, I call patriots. We have a very different view on this.”

Reid responded, “These people think they’re patriots, and they’re not. If they’re patriots, we’re in big trouble.”

“It’s a pretty broad brush when you have boy scouts there. You have veterans at the event. You have grandparents at the event. And these are people who, as long as they’re not promoting violence, in my opinion…” said Heller.

Reid, shocked by Heller’s remarks, said, “Promoting violence? There were sniper rifles. Talk to Sheriff Gillespie – automatic weapons. That’s grandmothers? That’s boy scouts? I hope not, because we got more problems with boy scouts than whether they can have gay leaders, if that’s the case.”

Heller told Gillan and Tarkanian that he took “more issue with BLM coming in with a military army of individuals with snipers. I was talking to individuals at the event, and to have your own government with sniper lenses on you – it made a lot of people very uncomfortable.”

Heller says he plans to call for hearings on Capitol Hill to try and find out why BLM handled the situation so heavy-handedly as well as the situation surrounding the federal ownership of land, while Reid has spoken to Clark County Sheriff Gillespie, Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell, and FBI chief James Comey as to what steps to take next.

Despite Reid’s characterization of Bundy supporters as “domestic terrorists,” the only violence that occurred during the dispute was when BLM agents tasered and assaulted Bundy supporters during an incident on April 9.

Reid’s characterization of American protesters as “domestic terrorists fits the narrative that the federal government has been pushing for years through literature such as the MIAC report, which framed Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag, as potential terrorists. In 2012, a Homeland Security study was leaked which characterized Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.

Spokespeople for Reid refused to comment when asked by Appalachian Area News about the double standard of supporting armed agents attempting to steal personal private property while demonizing armed Americans resisting them.

For slime ball Reid, armed federal snipers and machine gunners good, armed Americans bad. OK got it. Now why would anyone need that pesky second amendment?

Turns out Reid has been using the federal and state governments for years to push hard working Americans off their land in order to secure shady energy deals.

Check out this article by Jerome Corsi for the extensive details. It does not include the Solar farm story many in the alternative media have pointed to as the reason Bundy was being pushed of his land. Even though their were specific references to thew removal of Bundy cattle in project documents, the project was shelved in 2013.

Contributed By Asa Johnson

Editor, & Top Contributor of Appalachian Area News Network & Affiliates


Share on Facebook81Tweet about this on Twitter11Share on Google+18Share on LinkedIn0Share on Reddit335Share on StumbleUpon0Pin on Pinterest0
  • JackSchitt

    Harry Reid Doubles Down: “If They’re Patriots, We’re in Big Trouble”
    a statement like that from some1 working for the people, we’re in big trouble

  • Wayne Herrod

    Harry, you swine, aren’t you talking about your employees- the BLM using snipes and “assualt” weapons? We aren’t allowed to have the big guns or to shoot bad people, but you are so tell me again, just who are the bad guys?

  • tionico

    Interesting” this is the first report I’ve read of the Patriots who showed up in support of Bundy and liberty that mentioned “machine guns” or “automatic weapons” in the hands of the demonstrators, or snipers. The illegal federal goons DID have both, and deployed them.

    Reid is just bent because what he thought was a quiet, secret, backroom, inside deal is now none of the above. And his face has been shoved deep in it. And it stinks. And he knows it. He’s playing damage control now, attempting to shift the blame, erect a straw man to destroy, throw out a red herring. Not to mention lie and continue his cheating. I hope the CONgress DO investigate this schemozzle, as there is little question at this point Reid has brown stuff on his hands. I think this would be a fitting way to rid our nation of his stranglehold on the Senate. Perhaps then we could actually get a couple of things DONE back on the ONLY piece of land FedGov lawfully owns……. (exept for military bases and the post office system)

  • ianrey

    I hate the US Government and refuse to abide by its laws or pay taxes to compensate for the protection of the Constitution. I’m a Patriot!

    • tionico

      if both statements above are “true”, then you have just proven yourself a liar. Patriots do NOT hate the US Government, nor do we refuse to abide by the laws governing this nation. BLM their new darling Harry Reid and son have demonstrated more hatred for the US GOvernment AND our laws than Bundy and all the others who showed up to support his lawful cause.

  • djsmps

    Along with Pelosi, Feinstein, and Schumer, Reid is one the most disgusting people in Congress. Vote these people out.

    • Cin

      Throw King, McCain and Graham in there and you’ve got it.

      • djsmps


  • Charles Aulds

    To be fair, and to be honest, if it were his or her political opponents, or (God forbid) people of dark skinned races with sniper rifles, I think the opinion of the writer of this article would be quite different, and I mean different in the sense of “completely the opposite.”

    • Mike Sloan

      LOL…wow…its funny how after mainstream media says something brain dead morons everywhere just repeat their talking points like they have something to say…

      DO you really believe that shit dude??? Everybody’s not as racist as you….lol

      Do you honestly believe that someone that believes in liberty and who is anti -big govt would automatically just reverse the ideologically consistent beliefs they have had for the last 10 years BECAUSE THE FUCKING PROTESTORS ARE BLACK??? ARE YOU A FUCKING IDIOT OR SOMETHING!!!???


      Its just shameful man….

      You don’t even know who the author is, what he believes, or what kind of political ideology he holds..


      You think cause hes speaking out against obvious big government abuses that HES JUST GOT TO BE ONE OF THOSE “RACIST CONSERVATIVES?”

      Get a fucking clue jack hole…. escape that false left-right paradigm used to cage your mind and join the rest of humanity….

      There only freedom and LIBERTY….and there is EVERYTHING ELSE….


      WHAT THE HELL! lol MSNBC and all the lefty blogs runs this exact talking point and low and behold it finds its way to the Appalachian Area News Comment section….LMMFAO!!!! UNbelievable…

      • Charles Aulds

        Thanks … I couldn’t have described you better than you did with that diatribe if I’d worked on it all afternoon. :-)

        • vongoh

          His answer was great. Totally justified.

          You are superficial in understanding & and otherwise completely ignorant (in the literal definition of the word) of the nature of this country – its history – the Law (as in, the real law that is meant to constrain their behavior) – and the clear simple meaning that is written all over the Constitution and Bill of Rights that are meant to protect YOU.

          Apparently you are also literally ignorant any of the real context and events in this case. Literally, as in “you have no idea what the true facts are” ignorant.

          100% wrong, and on the wrong side.

          • Charles Aulds

            His answer was a resort to a personal attack, in other words, he lacks confidence in his position, or in his manhood. Or both. He demonstrated weakness of character or intellect.

            Or both.

          • tionico

            you attacked him personally, with false accusations unsupported by anything outside of your own assertions. He merely responded in kind.

            Now, to clarify: YOU do not demonstrate any familiarity with our Founding, history, OR our Constitution, let alone current law. If you did, you would realise that for ANY federal agancy such as BLM to claim onwhership of that, or any other, land or attempt to control it or dictate who can do what upon it is directly opposed to that document, which, until it is ammended or formally tossed aside, remains the law of the land. Get your copy and read it. Don’t have one? Shame on you. Get one and read it. Five or six times. And don’t tell me you already know what’s in it, cause you have just proven you do NOT. Further, that document spells out clearly Bundy’s right to due process, which was NOT observed, before any taking of his lands or personal property can be effected.

            Go cure your ignorance first, then perhaps come back and contribute to the discussion constructively.

          • Charles Aulds

            Readers can judge for themselves, I’m sure, and I certainly haven’t attacked anyone, or said anything I feel justifies the personal attacks on me. I’m just stating that it demonstrates a lack of character. And a lack of confidence/backbone.

          • DriveAngry

            I’ll quote your words back to you then…..

            “To be fair, and to be honest, if it were his or her political opponents, or (God forbid) people of dark skinned races with sniper rifles, I think the opinion of the writer of this article would be quite different, and I mean different in the sense of “completely the opposite.””

            Your first post was nothing *but* an ad hominem attack on the author. You deserve everything you’ve gotten here.

          • vongoh

            Sounds more like he’s justifiably pissed off at what’s going on in this country overall.

            And flabbergasted that some people are literally so dense that they cant see big HUGE elephants staring them in the face every day.

            Trust me when I say Right/Left – Blue/Red is a complete joke to me now .. but ..

            The nation is divided between those who can see and understand whats really happening And those that are living in a bubble, delusional, or just too deep in denial to want to believe it.

          • Mike Sloan

            NO YOU DID THAT!

            WTF! Are you insane or something?

            YOU RESORTED TO A PERSONAL ATTACK BY BASICALLY CALLING THE AUTHOR OF THIS ARTICLE RACIST!!!!! This demonstrates s “lack confidence in your position” which is that if the protestors were black this article would never exist because the author would then be on the side of the government….


            Do you not understand that???

            You called someone racist for not liking government robbery and usurpation then when someone calls you out on it its they who “demonstrated weakness of character or intellect”


          • Charles Aulds

            Are you going to throw a little temper tantrum now? Maybe you should consider how that looks to the adults in the room.

          • Mike Sloan

            Yeah thats why my comments have way more upvotes than you race baiting bullshit….THE “ADULTS” concur…

    • albrevin

      Prove it.

    • Amber

      You’re trying to use a hypothetical scenario, complete with your own imagined outcome of the scenario, to discredit this article? I am unconvinced of the rightness of your position.

      • Charles Aulds

        I’m simply saying that if these were Muslims, or Sikhs, or even Hispanic Americans, brandishing automatic weapons and threatening to use them to prevent officials from enforcing a law, any law, we would not be reading this, at least not here.

        I simply stated that in the interest of fairness and honestly, we should admit that, at least, if only to ourselves, in private.

        Do you believe that *all Americans* have the rights that these people have claimed?

        Calling them “terrorists” is, perhaps hyperbole, but it’s nothing we haven’t seen used, time and again, in the past 13 years, to justify abuses of American civil rights. It’s just that some groups have been conveniently excluded from the law, Constitutional law, that should be applied to all, equally. Because that is the traditional American way.

        • Mike Sloan

          God your an idiot….

          “I’m simply saying that if these were Muslims, or Sikhs, or even Hispanic
          Americans, brandishing automatic weapons and threatening to use them to
          prevent officials from enforcing a law, any law, we would not be
          reading this, at least not here.”

          How the hell do you know?????? Have you ever even visited this website before? Do you even know this author? YOU KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT THIS ORGANIZATION??? NOOOOO YOU DONT!

          YOU DONT EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT A CONSERVATIVE WEBSITE!!!! SHeesh…. NOONE HERE IS SAYING OR WOULD EVER SAY WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING! ESPECIALLY NOT THE AUTHOR WHO I HAPPEN TO KNOW….THATS WHY I AM SO TAKEN ABACK BY YOUR COMMENTS….. you dont even fucking know this guy and to assume he would not advocate the same rights for EVERYONE because of race is just unbelievable and unfounded bullshit….

          I know that the government told you people that don’t like them are racist BUT ITS NOT FUCKING TRUE.

          If fact I happen to know the author is what you would call “socially liberal.” He believe in immigration and the right to travel freely without the force of government telling people they cannot because they have crossed some imaginary line… He believes govt hos NO RIGHT TO tell anyone who they can marry, He is also pro-choice and believes government has no right to dictate whether or not someone can terminate their pregnancy though he finds it morally reprehensible.


          I cant believe people actually think like this …. it just goes to show you how entrenched the government propaganda has gotten.

          When you assume you are JUST AN ASS….You dont have a leg to stand on and have made an entirely baseless claim that is supported by ABSOLUTELY NOTHING….

          • Charles Aulds

            I believe you are trying to change a precedent that was set years ago; in a new “post-9/11″ world (that I would argue isn’t “new” at all), most Americans adopted the view that said say the primary role of government is national security or enforcing the law, not protecting individual liberty, civil rights, or promoting justice in society.

            Where were these great defenders of American liberty in 2003? More recently, where were they when Tennessee became the first US state to allow the federal government to perform unwarranted searches of vehicles on Tennessee highways in October 2011? http://bit.ly/1mpCnhp

            Americans, in times of convenience, claim to put liberty above all else, but when forced to choose between security/safety and liberty, they chose their own personal safety.