Will Trump Pardon Cliven Bundy?

The Nevada rancher goes on trial next week, but he might not need Trump’s help.

Cliven Bundy at his Nevada ranch in 2014.John Locher/Las Vegas Review-Journal via AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

In 2014, Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy became a right-wing folk hero after he led an armed standoff with federal law enforcement over the Bureau of Land Management’s attempt to seize his cattle. He’d been illegally grazing the cows on federal land for decades and, despite court orders, refusing to pay more than $1 million in overdue grazing fees and fines. Militia groups and tea party types have rallied around Bundy as he fights criminal charges related to the “Battle of Bunkerville.”

And now that President Donald Trump has pardoned Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, infamous for his extreme use of profiling to target undocumented immigrants, Bundy’s supporters see an opportunity for him as well. Bundy has been in jail since February 2016 and is set to stand trial on October 10 for his role in the ranch standoff, along with his sons Ryan and Ammon and four other defendants.

Longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone has been leading the charge for a pardon, as he did for Arpaio. In July, Stone was the featured attraction at a Las Vegas fundraiser for the Bundy defendants. He gave a speech calling on Trump to “review this case in the name of justice, in the name of mercy” and “pardon every member of the Bundy family.” Following the roadmap he used for Arpaio, he’s also raised the issue on the conspiracy-theory website InfoWars, and he repeated the pardon calls last month in another visit to Las Vegas.

It’s unclear how receptive Trump might be to the idea of a Bundy pardon. Trump was lukewarm on Bundy in 2014, when the ranch standoff was in the news. He told Fox News’ Sean Hannity at the time, “I like him, I like his spirit, his spunk and the people that are so loyal…I respect him.” But he expressed uneasiness with Bundy’s taking the law into his own hands and suggested that he “cut a deal” with the Obama administration to settle the cattle debate.

Now that Trump is president, he may have other ideas. Like his pardon of Arpaio, pardoning Bundy might play well with his base, particularly the white nationalists who aren’t bothered by—or even admire—Bundy’s 2014 comments that “the Negro” might have been better off under slavery. Most of the mainstream politicians who’d initially supported Bundy’s cause quickly dropped him after video of his diatribe surfaced. Even Hannity dropped Bundy’s cause.

But since becoming a presidential candidate and then president, Trump has been sympathetic to the Bundy faction, which backed him in the election. He chose a Bundy ranch conspirator, Gerald DeLemus, as a New Hampshire convention delegate and state co-chair of Veterans for Trump. DeLemus was unable to cast his vote for Trump at the Republican nominating convention because he was in jail on weapons and other charges from his role at the ranch standoff. Federal prosecutors described DeLemus as a “gunman and midlevel organizer” who’d overseen “Camp Liberty,” which housed armed militia members near the Bundy ranch for several weeks after the BLM’s attempt to round up Bundy’s cattle. DeLemus pleaded guilty to the charges and was later sentenced to seven years in prison.

Trump also picked a Bundy sympathizer to serve on his transition team for the Interior Department, which oversees the BLM. In the 1990s, Karen Budd-Falen, a Wyoming property rights lawyer and former Reagan-era Interior Department official, represented ranchers in Bunkersville, where Bundy lives, who sued the BLM for trying to get their cows off the habitat of an endangered desert tortoise.

In 2014, Budd-Falen told the Daily Caller that “the Cliven Bundy situation goes to show how American citizens react when a government has so expanded that it believes that the citizens are subservient to political power.” She went on, “This is simply a case of the government putting a rancher out of business because the rancher has to prove a negative—the burden is on the rancher while all deference goes to the federal government and the government only has to make allegations to eliminate a family, a business, a community, a way of life.” Over the summer, rumors surfaced that Trump intended to nominate Budd-Falen to head the BLM. Budd-Falen did not respond to a request for comment.

In one of his last official acts in office, President Barack Obama turned 300,000 acres around the Bundy ranch into the Gold Butte National Monument, a federally protected area managed by the BLM. After Trump took office, one of the federal monuments Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke recommended shrinking was Gold Butte.

Despite the Trump administration’s sympathy for Bundy, a pardon might be premature. Bundy hasn’t yet been convicted of a crime, and it’s not clear that he ever will be. The government has so far failed to convince a jury to convict anyone from the Bundy family on any criminal charges, either in Nevada or in Oregon, where Bundy’s son Ammon led the armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in 2016.

Jurors have been open to the arguments made by the Bundys and their allies that they were simply defending their property rights, not terrorizing federal land managers. There have so far been three different Bundy-related trials. The first, a 2016 trial concerning the Oregon wildlife refuge occupation, brought acquittals of all seven defendants, including Ammon Bundy. The second, over the Nevada ranch standoff, resulted in a hung jury and two convictions of minor players who aren’t related to the Bundys. A third trial, in August, of four men charged with weapons offenses at the ranch, produced several not guilty verdicts. The jury deadlocked on the remaining charges and the judge declared a mistrial. Given the government’s track record so far, Cliven Bundy might not need a Trump pardon. The jury may do the job for him.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate