Skip to content

Long Live The Constitutionalist Sheriff by Pastor Chuck Baldwin

By Chuck Baldwin
August 10, 2010
NewsWithViews.com

One of the tragedies of the current misled, uninformed, and otherwise preoccupied American citizenry is the seeming apathy regarding the importance and necessity of electing constitutionalist sheriffs. In many ways, State governors and county sheriffs just might be the most important elected offices in America. It is no hyperbole to say that State governors and county sheriffs form the last line of defense against tyranny and oppression. If our governors and sheriffs do not understand the principles of freedom and federalism, there is virtually zero protection against the abuses of liberty–save the right of the people to personally and individually defend liberty via the principles of God-given Natural Law.

Hence, a freedom-minded sheriff is invaluable to liberty’s defense. And perhaps at no time in America’s history has it been more necessary that we elect freedom-loving sheriffs than it is today, what with the ever-growing propensity of the federal government to trample and usurp State and constitutional protections of freedom.

For example, in an almost totally non-reported incident, an armed conflict between federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) agents and a Nevada Sheriff’s SWAT team was averted only by virtue of the fact that, at the last minute, BLM backed down from the impending confrontation.

For the record: federal police agencies have a long history of committing illegal searches and seizures (even assault and murder–can anyone say, “Ruby Ridge” or “Waco”?) against the US citizenry. But BLM might be the most notorious federal police agency of all. The tactics BLM employs against western landowners sometimes border on Nazi-like. When the late, great Helen Chenoweth was an Idaho congresswoman, she tried to raise awareness of (and opposition to) this out-of-control federal agency. I urge readers to read Rep. Chenoweth’s interview with Michael Reagan about this subject. See it here.

According to Rep. Chenoweth, “BLM is taking onto themselves law enforcement that is normally saved for the State, law enforcement over motor vehicles. They’ve written into the regulation without authority from Congress, the ability to stop vehicles or to search people, to search a place or a vehicle without warrant or process; to be able to seize without warrant or process any piece of evidence and to test people for potential DUI (driving under the influence).”

Chenoweth continued: “Our founders, when establishing our system of government wanted to make sure that law enforcement was closest to the people. You and I have talked before about how important it is to make sure that you elect the very best local county sheriff because he should be regarded as the highest law enforcement officer in the area because he is accountable to the voters. They really worried about a national, a federal, law enforcement. To federalize our law enforcement is to create a situation that the pilgrims were trying to escape.

“We are moving quickly to that. The Bureau of Land Management is taking onto themselves law enforcement authority that Congress never gave them. In the Federal Land Policy and Management Act that was passed in the early 1970s it made it clear that Congress said that, first, you must go to your local county sheriff for law enforcement activities.”

Chenoweth added, “In the BLM proposed rules and regulations, you can’t remove any plants or soil or pick up any rocks or minerals. You can’t drive on any vegetation or soil. You can’t disturb soil at all. Now you can’t set a foot on soil without disturbing it. You can’t set a foot on a ground plant without disturbing it.”

For the sheriff in Nye County, Nevada, BLM abridgments of liberty had gone too far. When BLM threatened to arrest the sheriff if he refused to go along with BLM’s illegal searches and seizures against Nye County citizens, Sheriff Tony DeMeo countered by telling BLM in no uncertain terms that should any agent attempt to enforce BLM’s unconstitutional policies, he would have his deputies arrest them. DeMeo even had his SWAT teams standing by to enforce the law AGAINST THE OUT-OF-CONTROL FEDERAL AGENCY. To put it in Sheriff DeMeo’s words, “We’d be standing between them [BLM] and my constituents [county residents].” At the last minute, BLM backed off and the confrontation between the Nye County sheriff’s office and the federal agency was averted.

See Sheriff DeMeo’s testimony on the incident here.

Now, Sheriff Tony DeMeo is exactly the kind of sheriff the Constitution requires! Unfortunately, it seems that the vast majority of sheriffs across the country have no idea as to what their constitutional authority entails, and seem to have no discernment and understanding of just what the federal government is doing to usurp State and local jurisdiction. Or if they do, they seem to lack the courage to act upon their power and authority. Or maybe they simply lust after federal monies (better known as bribes).

Of course, there are a few sheriffs across America who seem to be aware of what’s going on and have the guts to do something about it. A precious few. Along with Sheriff Tony DeMeo, there is Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County, Arizona, Sheriff Shane Harrington of Wibaux County, Montana, Sheriff Paul Babeu of Pinal County, Arizona, and, of course, there are former Sheriffs Ray Nash of Dorchester County, South Carolina, Richard Mack of Graham County, Arizona, and Jay Printz of Ravalli County, Montana. Plus, if the good people of Larimer County, Colorado, will elect Carl Bruning as their sheriff, there will be another principled constitutionalist sheriff to add to the list of patriot sheriffs. To visit Carl’s campaign web site, go here.

Readers should know, too, that Sheriff Mack has a plethora of outstanding books and videos relating to the role and duty of a constitutional sheriff on his web site. I highly recommend that you avail yourself to as much of Mack’s materials as you can. Here is his web site.

If liberty has any chance of surviving in the United States, it will be because the American people wake up to the importance and necessity of electing constitutionalist governors and sheriffs. Sheriffs, especially, are critical to the maintenance of liberty. It is a truism that, next to the people themselves, the sheriff’s office helps form the last line of defense against federal abuse of power. Long live the constitutionalist Sheriff!

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

P.S. We are trying to keep up with those requesting to be added to our new PATRIOT BUSINESSES web page, but are having a hard time keeping up with requests. Please be patient. We are adding them as fast as we can. My small staff is quite overloaded, but hopes to be caught up by the end of the week. To see the new PATRIOT BUSINESSES web page, click here.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

© 2010 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved

  • Share/Bookmark

RMGO: Pro-Gun voters can’t support Justin Smith for Larimer Sheriff

Following is an email sent out by the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners:

Pro-Gun voters can’t support Justin Smith for Larimer Sheriff

If you’re a Republican in Larimer County, you need to know something: Justin Smith is not pro-gun.

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO), Colorado’s largest gun rights organization, sends surveys to candidates across the state, asking specific firearms questions.

For Sheriff candidates, this survey is unique, and tailored to find out whether a candidate is interested in representing citizens or, frankly, just a part of the law enforcement fraternity.

You don’t have to be a libertarian to be concerned about America’s law enforcement, especially under an Obama Administration, but we all want officers who strive for the safety of our communities while still refusing to step on citizens’ freedoms. There’s a balance there, and we’d like to see candidates who understand that balance.

When we asked Larimer County’s two Republican Sheriff candidates to state their views on our survey, we were quite surprised by the results.

Justin Smith’s survey looked more like it came from a Denver Democrat than a Larimer County Republican.

Honestly, I was shocked.

Though he answered a few questions pro-gun (even Democrats in Boulder County will do that), the list of issues Justin Smith has with gun owners are quite extensive:

1. Justin Smith has repeatedly stated he will enter permit holders into a statewide criminal database. This is a massive issue that puts permit holders at great risk – especially when visiting anti-gun areas like Denver and Boulder, where law enforcement is ruled by gun-hating liberals.

The potential for abuse is massive, and could lead to profiling of gun owners, terror watch lists (for permit holders, as if they have anything to do with “terrorists”), and many, many other issues –- all stemming from entering permit holders into a statewide databse.

Conservatives in the Colorado legislature have attempted to repeal this option for sheriffs – yet Justin Smith has vocally pronounced that citizens are already on so many lists that one more won’t make a difference.

Remember: entering permit holders into a statewide criminal database is optional. The person you elect for sheriff will make the choice on entering permit holders into a dangerous and insidious statewide database.

2. Justin Smith opposes Constitutional Carry, like that passed in Arizona just months ago.  A no-permit-needed carry law, which still only allows the law-abiding to carry, removes the lists and costs of a permit while leaving the permit process in place for those who want reciprocity with other states.

3. Like Sarah Brady, Justin Smith supports the Brady Law. Though Colorado’s Constitution prohibits citizens’ right to keep and bear arms from being “…called into question…” (Article II, Section 13), Justin Smith sees no conflict with that, even though he’s required to swear an oath to our Constitution.

The Brady Bill was a litmus test issue for gun owners when it was first proposed, and is still a good gauge of the pro-gun credentials of a candidate.

The Brady law is the cornerstone of all gun control, and the prime tool of abuse of our firearms freedoms — yet Justin Smith refuses to stand against Brady, and the federal mandate it forces on Colorado. As the Obama Administration seeks to expand their war on our Second Amendment freedoms, he and anti-gun Attorney General Eric Holder will use the Brady Act to do it. We need a Sheriff who will stand against this unconstitutional powergrab for our freedoms.

These are just a few of the issues we have with Justin Smith as Sheriff — there are certainly others. And taken individually, it might not warrant our attention. But when we look at the entire package, Justin Smith is just too dangerous for Larimer County gun owners.

You’ve probably heard the argument from some law enforcement: “Justin carries a gun, how could he be anti-gun?” Understand, though, that often it is law enforcement associations which are the main lobby in the Denver for gun control.

RMGO has worked in the State Capitol — advocating for firearms owners’ rights — for more than a decade and a half now. The main proponents for gun control usually have a gun on their hip and a badge in their wallet. Just because you carry a gun doesn’t make you pro-gun.

In fact, the lobbyist for the Police Chiefs in Colorado is also the lobbyist for Colorado Ceasefire, a rabid group of radical gun-haters. So, don’t assume law enforcement officers are on the pro-gun side because, increasingly now, many are not. And their associations have never been pro-gun.

Larimer County needs a sheriff who is principled, and understands the Constitution that he swears an oath to.

And that’s what we found in Carl Bruning.

Not only did Carl Bruning answer our survey 100% in favor of your gun rights, he also has a history of standing up for freedom.

Importantly, Carl Bruning will remove concealed carry permit holders from the CCIC database. That’s a huge change, and one permit holders in Larimer County support overwhelmingly.

For these reasons — and many others — RMGO PAC has endorsed Carl Bruning for Sheriff.

If you’re a gun owner in Larimer County, you cannot vote for Justin Smith for Sheriff.

Simply put, he just won’t be the kind of principled, pro-gun leader who’s needed.

A Republican is going to be Sheriff in this county — no Democrat or Independent has been elected to Sheriff in Larimer County since WWII. Let’s make sure it’s the right Republican.

Vote for Carl Bruning for Larimer County Sheriff.

Paid for by
Rocky Mountain Gun Owners PAC
Colorado’s Only Pro-Gun Political Action Committee

  • Share/Bookmark

LISTEN: Carl Bruning radio interview (6/26/10)

Carl Bruning was interviewed on “Radio Amerika Now” on June 26, 2010.

  • Share/Bookmark

“We Need Constitutional Sheriffs Now!” By Carl Bruning

Carl Bruning“It is time for the sworn protectors of Liberty, the County Sheriffs, to walk tall and defend their citizens from all enemies of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights.”

Americans are facing the stark reality that their Constitutional rights are being shredded. Nearly every action taken by the Federal government today violates the Constitution that sheriffs and the military have taken an oath to defend. The Sheriff may truly be the last hope for saving our constitutional Republic and our liberties.

Thomas Jefferson wrote in “The value of Constitutions”, that “there is no honorable law enforcement authority in Anglo-American law so ancient as that of the county sheriff whose role as a peace officer goes back at least to the time of Alfred the Great.”

The Office of the Sheriff has existed for over one thousand years and is the oldest law enforcement position in the United States. The word Sheriff is derived from the “Shire-Reeve” (who was the most powerful English law authority figure). Throughout history, the sheriff was recognized as the chief law enforcement officer in his shire or county, and was responsible for maintaining law and order and being an officer of the peace.

The County Sheriff is elected by, for, and of the People, and is our last line of defense against an oppressive and over-reaching government and tyranny. The Sheriffs are powerful executors of the law, and the Supreme law of the land is the Constitution.

In 1775, Edmund Burke declared, “Bad laws are the worst form of tyranny.” By that definition, we have tyranny today. Thousands of new laws are being shoved down our throats, and most bear little resemblance to the Constitution. Indeed, the very essence of tyranny is defined by the blind enforcement of bad laws. A Sheriff has the power, the authority, and the responsibility to resist tyranny and unconstitutional laws and actions.

Our founders understood that Liberty was our most important asset to defend. Samuel Adams said,”The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are worth defending against all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.”

The New American magazine article, “Sheriffs Oppose Encroachment of Federal Agents Into Their Jurisdictions”, stated: “There are dozens of candidates for sheriff nationwide who share [the] view on the supremacy of state government and the constitutional locus of police power. These lawmen read the Constitution and nowhere in it do they find authorization for the federalization of law enforcement. In fact, they argue, the Constitution’s federal system endows local police with greater authority than any federal agent when it comes to enforcing the laws in their counties.”

The article continued with, “… the sheriffs and sheriff candidates … firmly assert their preeminence in the field of law enforcement. Their principle premise is that as sheriffs are the highest elected law-enforcement agent in the land and they are directly answerable to the voters and chosen by them, then they stand on the top rung of the police ladder. Federal officials, they argue, are not on the ladder at all, as the Constitution does not endow the federal government with police power and therefore the Tenth Amendment reserves that right to the states and to the people.

In 1994, Sheriff Richard Mack stood up to the Federal government and filed a lawsuit to stop the “Brady bill” that was signed into law by President Clinton. Six other sheriffs from around the country joined the lawsuit. On June 27, 1997, the Supreme Court ruled that the Brady bill was in fact unconstitutional and that the Federal Government could not commandeer state or county officers for federal bidding [Mack/Printz v. USA]. Justice Scalia wrote for the majority, stating, “The Federal Government may not compel the states to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program.”

In 2005, a bill (HB 284) was introduced in the Montana State Legislature which required the County Sheriff be notified before any federal agents are allowed to enter the state with the intention of carrying out law enforcement actions. The bill provided not only for pre-notification, but that the Sheriff must also give consent before federal agents may proceed. Every state legislature should draft a similar bill for their next session.

In his book titled, “The County Sheriff — America’s Last Hope”, Sheriff Richard Mack wrote: “If we are to get America back, if we are indeed to return to the constitutional Republic we were meant to be, then it will be up to us, the sheriffs of America… who have the guts and dedication to tell the feds that we will no longer tolerate their intervention, control, meddling, mandates, or criminal behavior.”

The Sheriff is the chief law enforcement authority in our county, and he is elected by the ultimate power source, We The People. It is time for us to elect County Sheriffs who will walk tall and defend their citizens from all enemies of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. The future of our constitutional Republic may depend on it.

  • Share/Bookmark

Former Congressman Tom Tancredo Endorses Bruning for Sheriff

Fort Collins, CO – America’s leading voice for border security, former five-term Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, has endorsed Carl Bruning for Larimer County Sheriff.

Tancredo declared, “Americans want secure borders and immigration enforcement. Carl Bruning stands tough on illegal immigration, and he has my endorsement for Larimer County Sheriff.”

“Tom understands that this is a matter of national security, public safety and fiscal necessity. Our team is humbly honored with this prestigious endorsement,” commented Bruning.

Tom Tancredo and Carl Bruning


Bruning joined Mr. Tancredo in support of the Arizona Immigration bill at the “Phoenix Rising” rally June 5th.

The Bruning for Sheriff campaign has also been honored with endorsements by Colorado State Senator Kevin Lundberg, former Sheriff Richard Mack, the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners PAC, former Chief of Police Rich Wyatt, Colonel Jim Bush (USMC, retired), former Nassau County Police Detective Rudy Zitti, Ray Hickman, Patrick Albright and the Republican Liberty Caucus. For more information click here.

Following is a video of Carl Bruning speaking on June 19th, 2010 at the Loveland “United We Stand with Arizona Rally”:

Tom Tancredo is a former five-term congressman from Colorado and 2008 candidate for the Republican presidential nomination. He serves as chairman of the Rocky Mountain Foundation and is the author of “In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America’s Border and Security.” For more information visit: http://therockymountainfoundation.org/

  • Share/Bookmark

Republican sheriff candidates talk about credentials

From a recent article from the North Forty News:

By Dan MacArthur
North Forty News

The Republican Party will have a local contest on its primary ballot in August as two men seek the party’s nomination to run for Larimer County Sheriff.

Republican Jim Alderden has held the post for nearly 12 years and cannot seek re-election because of term limits.

Carl Bruning

The “Constitutional sheriff” is Carl Bruning’s clarion call in his campaign for the Republican nomination for county sheriff.

“I’m running to protect your rights to life, liberty, property, firearms and freedom,” Bruning has proclaimed ceaselessly at public forums and campaign events.

Such issues have dominated Bruning’s campaign – particularly gun rights and illegal immigration.

He pledged to zealously protect Second Amendment rights and to never enter the names of concealed weapons permit holders into state database.

While all announced candidates for the sheriff’s office have expressed similar support for protecting gun rights, Bruning said he is set apart by his oath to aggressively resist any government effort to seize citizens’ weapons or trample the Constitution, such as during the sieges at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

“If you value your right to keep and bear arms, Carl Bruning is the only choice for Larimer County Sheriff,” Rocky Mountain Gun Owners executive director Dudley Brown said in his endorsement.

Bruning asserts that sheriffs sometimes haven’t upheld their sacred oath to protect constitutional rights. “It is time for the sworn protectors of liberty, the sheriffs of these United States of America, to walk tall and stand up for our Constitution and Bill of Rights,” he said.

“I am a life-long Republican, and a champion for the Constitution and conservative values,” he added.

A 1984 graduate of the Air Force Academy, Bruning served as an aircraft commander leading aircrews on tactical airlift missions worldwide. He was deployed during Operation Desert Shield in 1990, defending Saudi Arabia from possible invasion by Iraq.

After his discharge the following year, Bruning earned a master of business administration degree from the University of Phoenix and worked as a business executive, manager and consultant for a number of companies.

As the only candidate with an MBA and a business background, Bruning said, he is well qualified to address budget issues. He pledged to look at every agency with a fresh perspective, pare administration to hire more patrol officers, and continue seeking alternatives to costly incarceration.

Despite his lack of law-enforcement experience, Bruning insisted he has “more than sufficient experience to be proficient in that role (as sheriff).” Bruning said he taking the classes necessary to be certified as a police officer, although he contended that, historically, sheriffs were not required to have law enforcement experience.

Bruning, 49, has lived in Fort Collins since 2006.

  • Share/Bookmark

Republican Liberty Caucus endorses Carl Bruning for Sheriff

Republican Liberty Caucus

Fort Collins—-Larimer County Sheriff candidate Carl Bruning has received the endorsement of the Republican Liberty Caucus. Carl Bruning is also endorsed by Colorado State Senator Kevin Lundberg, former Sheriff Richard Mack, Rocky Mountain Gun Owners PAC, former Chief of Police Rich Wyatt, Colonel Jim Bush (USMC, retired), former Nassau County Police Detective Rudy Zitti, Ray Hickman, and Poudre School District board member Patrick Albright.

Carl Bruning is running as “Your Constitutional Sheriff” in Larimer County. The Republican Liberty Caucus website states, “Each of our endorsed candidates share common goals of dramatically reducing spending, cutting taxes, and an overall sense that government needs to return to its proper role and exercise only those powers enumerated in the Constitution.”

Bruning is a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy, and served as an EC-130H pilot and aircraft commander in Operation Desert Shield. He earned a Master of Business Administration degree and has held senior executive business positions including general manager and vice president. Carl is the only candidate for sheriff with an MBA degree and business experience.

For more information about Carl Bruning for Sheriff visit: www.carlbruning.com

  • Share/Bookmark

Sheriff Richard Mack endorses Bruning for Sheriff

Carl Bruning, candidate for Larimer County Sheriff, receives endorsement from former Sheriff Richard Mack

Carl Bruning is running as “Your Constitutional Sheriff” in Larimer County .  “It is time for the sworn protectors of liberty, the sheriffs of these United States of America , to walk tall and stand up for our Constitution and Bill of Rights,” he declared.

Bruning has received the endorsement from former Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack.  Sheriff Mack filed a lawsuit challenging the “Brady bill”, and won a decision at the U.S. Supreme Court on the issue of States’ rights.  He has written a book titled, “The County Sheriff – America ’s Last Hope”, where he states,  “The sheriff absolutely has the power and responsibility to defend his citizens.”

Former Sheriff Richard Mack said, “Carl Bruning is a defender of the Constitution and our Bill of Rights.  Carl is a distinguished U.S. Air Force pilot commander, and he has the senior executive business experience needed in the Sheriff’s Office today.  As a former Sheriff, I am proud to endorse Carl Bruning as the next Sheriff of Larimer County, Colorado.”

Bruning is a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy, where he received a Bachelor of Science degree in 1984.  He served with distinction as a U.S. Air Force pilot and aircraft commander in Operation Desert Shield, and received an honorable discharge in 1991.  Carl then earned a Master of Business Administration degree, and began a second successful career in business.  Bruning has held senior executive leadership positions, including General Manager and Vice President.

Bruning has also been endorsed by Colorado State Senator Kevin Lundberg, and the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners PAC.  “The Sheriff is a very important elected official, especially to gun owners,” said Dudley Brown, RMGO Executive Director. “If you value your right to keep and bear arms, Carl Bruning is the only choice for Larimer County Sheriff.”

Carl Bruning is on the ballot for the Republican primary on August 10, 2010.

Additional information can be found at www.carlbruning.com
###

  • Share/Bookmark

Oath Keepers want sheriffs back as top cop

CARL’S NOTE:  The Associated Press didn’t get all their facts straight in this article.  I am not running against an incumbent, Sheriff James Alderden, nor am I a “retired” Air Force pilot (I served our country with pride as a USAF pilot for 7 years, 4 months).

Oath Keepers want sheriffs back as top cop
By MATT GOURAS (AP)

HELENA, Mont. — For Rex Nichols, the right person to guard against unrestrained federal power encroaching on the rural northwestern Montana county he calls home is a figure straight out of the old West — the aggressive, no-nonsense sheriff.

The retired police officer and investment adviser intends to make that a reality, joining at least a dozen candidates in other states running for office on an intepretation of the Constitution they say means the sheriff is the highest law enforcer in the land, even above federal agents.

“Frankly if he wants to, the sheriff can probably do more for the Constitution and protecting the people than anyone else,” Nichols said.

The candidates are part of a loosely organized nationwide movement called the Oath Keepers, which is enlisting law enforcement and military personnel to vow to refuse 10 orders they say are unconstitutional, from confiscating guns to warrantless searches.

Critics call the Oath Keepers a dangerous anti-government “patriot” group recruiting on the edges of the militia movement and taking advantage of the anger and fear-mongering in some tea party circles.

The Southern Poverty Law Center is lumping the “particularly worrisome example of the Patriot revival” in with the hate groups it tracks. The group issued a report last year saying a new miliita movement is on the rise, and was concerned about the Oath Keepers making inroads into law enforcement.

The Oath Keepers are similar to the tea party crowd in that they often disagree what their movement represents. While bred from the libertarian spirit that courses through the West, the Oath Keepers don’t have a formal structure beyond the vague principles outlined in the 10 orders.

They say the sheriff is at the top primarily because he is the highest elected law enforcement agent in the land, directly responsible to the voters, and argue the Tenth Amendment gives the voters all power not expressly given the federal government under the Constitution.

The movement has gained traction, including in dozen or more sheriff’s races around the West from Orange County, Calif., to the northern border.

“It is time for the sworn protectors of liberty, the Sheriffs of these United States of America, to walk tall and stand up for our Constitution and Bill of Rights,” proclaimed Larimer County, Colo., candidate Carl Bruning in his campaign literature.

The retired Air Force pilot is running against an incumbent, Sheriff James Alderden, who himself is popular with the gun rights supporters for refusing to enforce a Colorado State University gun ban.

But Bruning even goes further by vowing to never enter the names of concealed-carry permit holders into the statewide database.

In Orange County, Calif., Oath Keeper Bill Hunt said California needs strong sheriffs to stand up to the federal government in the modern day wars over water, and to stick up for citizens who have a hard time getting concealed weapons permits.

Hunt, who is running a credible campaign in the large county, said it will only take a strong presence from the sheriff, and possibly lawsuits, not some sort of armed standoff.

“Leadership is meeting with the other agencies in government and letting them know it if they are outside their jurisdiction,” Hunt said.

The Oath Keepers’ founder says recruitment among conservatives at places like gun shows is hot right now because Democrats are in charge. But many of the federal violations against the Constitution he cited, such as military tribunals, began under Republicans and the Bush Administration.

The same Democrats who once were worried about constitutional rights under Bush, Stewart Rhodes said, have all but disappeared even though President Barack Obama is continuing many of the same policies. He hopes to someday recruit among liberal ranks once Republicans are back in control.

Stewart said the biggest threat to American freedom is a “climate of fear” that, at its worst, has allowed the federal government to imprison innocent people, such as the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

“It could happen again. It could happen to Muslims. It could happen to Hispanics. It could happen to white guys who are in militias,” he said. “That’s why there are Oath Keepers. You can’t always count on the three branches of government to check each other.”

Some Oath Keeper sheriff candidates say their actual work would be done in smaller and simpler ways: taking a stand against what they call unconstitutional traffic light cameras, random checkpoints where police check drivers for drinking or any other issue, and abuse of police power.

“You have to be reasonable. This is not about starting a revolution,” said Steve Kendley, a Lake County detective running for sheriff of his agency.

While he believes the sheriff is the top law enforcement in the county, he said he does not foresee armed standoffs with federal agents.

“I absolutely believe there is something constitutional sheriffs should do, and that is to communicate and explain to them it wouldn’t be allowed in that county. I don’t foresee anything except intelligent dialogue about it,” he said.

Others promise a tougher stance, and not all Oath Keepers agree exactly what kind of federal action breaches the Constitution.

Some say the imprisonment of military detainees at Guantanamo Bay is wrong, others disagree. And there is disagreement on whether the military interrogations involving water boarding represent unconstitutional torture.

Travis McAdam of the Montana Human Rights Network, a group that advocates for liberal social issues and also tracks racist extremist groups, also believes Oath Keepers are closer to the ideology of militiant miltia than they will admit.

“We have seen the patriot movement as a whole in Montana in the past year and a half focus a lot of time on the county sheriff,” he said. “The million dollar question is how effective are they going to be? The fact that they have recruited candidates is concerning.”

Nichols, the retired police officer running for sheriff in western Montana’s Lincoln County, said his biggest gripe is with police agencies armed with surplus military gear. He said police abuse of power — from both local and federal agents — needs to stop.

Nichols points to such past federal police actions as 1993’s standoff in Waco, Texas and the 1992 Ruby Ridge standoff in Idaho. Nichols said neither of those “injustices” would happen in his county — because he wouldn’t let the federal agents in.

“I am going to take my deputies and stand in the middle of the road and tell them to get the hell out,” he said. “And if they want a war, they got it.”

Oath Keepers disobey orders: http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2009/03/03/declaration-of-orders-we-will-not-obey/

  • Share/Bookmark

Video: Carl Bruning speaking at the Ft. Collins Tea Party 4/15/10

  • Share/Bookmark