Is Randy Newberg consistent in fighting for NR hunting?

Is Randy Newberg consistent in fighting for NR hunting?

  • Randy fights for all NRs, everywhere

  • Randy is a NIMBY who comes to your state for tags, but fights against you in MT

  • Who is Randy Newberg and how the hell did the Newbergs get two NV turn back tags in same year.

Results are only viewable after voting.
V

vansterdam123

Member
Messages
5
Randy Newberg acquires TWO Nevada turn back Antelope buck tags for BOTH him and his son in 2022. A very generous turn back program for non-residents of Nevada and lightning strikes the Newbergs twice.

But then Randy fights against NR interests when a Montana legislator tries to expand the "Come Home to Hunt program" to include spouses.

Is Randy Newberg consistent? Or is he a NIMBY when his own state wants to do something generous for a non-resident spouse of a native Montanan?

Take huge advantage of a Nevada generosity but then fight against his own state reciprocating that generosity for others?

Newberg.png


Screenshot_20230103-083735_Facebook (1).jpg
 
Third choice is particularly stupid......Obviously they spent the required online time per the way fcfs works to capture 2 tags.....
 
Don't know anything about Montana and can't blame Randy for taking full advantage of the loophole in a Nevada program that allows hundreds of tags from the Resident allocation to be redistributed to non residents.

Shame on the residents of Nevada for continuing to allow this to happen. Fortunately, I think enough of us are finally complaining to the right people and I am anticipating big changes to the FCFS program that would ensure that Resident tags are only available to Nevada residents. -----SS
 
He fights for public lands and public land access. NR allocation is not really his ball game and it never has been.
 
vansterdam123 said:
Randy Newberg acquires TWO Nevada turn back Antelope buck tags for BOTH him and his son in 2022. A very generous turn back program for non-residents of Nevada and lightning strikes the Newbergs twice.

But then Randy fights against NR interests when a Montana legislator tries to expand the "Come Home to Hunt program" to include spouses.

Is Randy Newberg consistent? Or is he a NIMBY when his own state wants to do something generous for a non-resident spouse of a native Montanan?

Take huge advantage of a Nevada generosity but then fight against his own state reciprocating that generosity for others?

View attachment 99006

View attachment 99007
Click to expand...
Sounds like your upset you can get your mail order bride a license???
 
Sparks Shooter said:
Don't know anything about Montana and can't blame Randy for taking full advantage of the loophole in a Nevada program that allows hundreds of tags from the Resident allocation to be redistributed to non residents.

Shame on the residents of Nevada for continuing to allow this to happen. Fortunately, I think enough of us are finally complaining to the right people and I am anticipating big changes to the FCFS program that would ensure that Resident tags are only available to Nevada residents. -----SS
Click to expand...
I thought that "loophole" was closed this year??.....
 
SPAZ said:
Montana gives WAY WAY WAY too many non resident and resident elk licenses away. Come home to hunt program is a FARCE.
Click to expand...

But on the nr nonresident general deer combo isn't there 4300 tags and 40 something percent goes to outfitters?
 
It’s great that Randy Newberg & son had an improbable NV (non-resident) family buck pronghorn hunt (2 tags). Maybe the first ever such Nevada NR family buck pronghorn hunt against such long odds. (Different units, same dates)

Just interesting that he would then oppose the MT legislature when they are making efforts to give a very similar family experience to the spouses of NR Native Montanans.

That is NIMBY political activity (Not In My BackYard).

Note: I do NOT have a MT native spouse.
 
Nothing better for me than a Republican super majority in Montana.

Waiting for the $200 lifetime big game combo license for Montana Natives.

That better pass or I'm no longer going to donate to any more Republican campaigns.

I mean they did ok with allowing me multiple $80 elk tags, $64 deer tags and lots of half price combo tags...but I bet they can do better.
 
While Buzz and others were getting ready for the fight on corner crossing, Randy was MIA.

So, yeah he fights, but on perhaps the most important public land fight in recent history, it was not just crickets but he made public the fact he didn't want the fight.

Not sure about these tags, but his "contract" work for AZFG, kinda soured me on rhe selfless public land warrior narrative he's spun. Didn't mean he was the only one doing so, but none of them are "creating advocates..........", while taking a paycheck on the backside.

And before the fan boys jump in, yes he did acknowledge the "contract", but only AFTER it became public.

Just reinforced the "follow the money" advice folks give
 
Keystone said:
While Buzz and others were getting ready for the fight on corner crossing, Randy was MIA.

So, yeah he fights, but on perhaps the most important public land fight in recent history, it was not just crickets but he made public the fact he didn't want the fight.

Not sure about these tags, but his "contract" work for AZFG, kinda soured me on rhe selfless public land warrior narrative he's spun. Didn't mean he was the only one doing so, but none of them are "creating advocates..........", while taking a paycheck on the backside.

And before the fan boys jump in, yes he did acknowledge the "contract", but only AFTER it became public.

Just reinforced the "follow the money" advice folks give
Click to expand...
Nobody is perfect. I was very disappointed in his engagement on corner crossing...and agree he and many others with their incessant 'content' production have not been a help to average sportsmen. On the other hand, he's done a tremendous amount of good and displayed sportsman in a much more positive light than clowns like ted nugent on outdoor tv. None of us are perfect...gotta take the good with the bad...and I think its clear Randy has done far more good than bad for sportsmen.
 
Keystone said:
While Buzz and others were getting ready for the fight on corner crossing, Randy was MIA.

So, yeah he fights, but on perhaps the most important public land fight in recent history, it was not just crickets but he made public the fact he didn't want the fight.

Not sure about these tags, but his "contract" work for AZFG, kinda soured me on rhe selfless public land warrior narrative he's spun. Didn't mean he was the only one doing so, but none of them are "creating advocates..........", while taking a paycheck on the backside.

And before the fan boys jump in, yes he did acknowledge the "contract", but only AFTER it became public.

Just reinforced the "follow the money" advice folks give
Click to expand...
HAHA.... So tell me you did not watch any of his videos on Corner Crossing... He has tackled the issue, and while he feels personally that corner crossing should be legal he also is not sure there is a legal path forward... As a result, his legal advisors (lawyers) said it is unlikely that Corner Crossing will ever be legal on a federal level and as a result why would he spend any time on the issue when there are other issues that he can have an impact on...

Oh and heaven forbid a person actually work and get a benefit from the work they have done.... Seriously, tell me with a straight face that you would not take the AZ deal? Seriously jealously is a sad look...
 
idahohuntr said:
Nobody is perfect. I was very disappointed in his engagement on corner crossing...and agree he and many others with their incessant 'content' production have not been a help to average sportsmen. On the other hand, he's done a tremendous amount of good and displayed sportsman in a much more positive light than clowns like ted nugent on outdoor tv. None of us are perfect...gotta take the good with the bad...and I think its clear Randy has done far more good than bad for sportsmen.
Click to expand...
I agree, but really I don't blame him at all for staying out of corner crossing. It is an issue that is not clear and from a federal/large scale level it will be almost impossible to pass. Why would you put your time and effort into an issue that is unlikely to pass or change.... Instead pick fights you can actually win.
 
elks96 said:
HAHA.... So tell me you did not watch any of his videos on Corner Crossing... He has tackled the issue, and while he feels personally that corner crossing should be legal he also is not sure there is a legal path forward... As a result, his legal advisors (lawyers) said it is unlikely that Corner Crossing will ever be legal on a federal level and as a result why would he spend any time on the issue when there are other issues that he can have an impact on...

Oh and heaven forbid a person actually work and get a benefit from the work they have done.... Seriously, tell me with a straight face that you would not take the AZ deal? Seriously jealously is a sad look...
Click to expand...

Yet, those same voices that told Buzz, JM and others the same thing, apparently found lawyers who thought differently.

Its not personal, I don't know Randy, he seems like a delightful guy. But when(hopefully), corner crossing wins in court, Randy will be among the voices that sat quiet.

I can't speak for Buzz, but I'm guessing behind the scenes, he was livid that Randy pussed out.


As to the other, if it wasn't a big deal, then why not say so up front? It's not jealousy, hanging g with Hush and Gritty, seems like torture.

Sorry I didn't worship your hero
 
elks96 said:
I agree, but really I don't blame him at all for staying out of corner crossing. It is an issue that is not clear and from a federal/large scale level it will be almost impossible to pass. Why would you put your time and effort into an issue that is unlikely to pass or change.... Instead pick fights you can actually win.
Click to expand...


He has a pretty large platform. Would take nothing to pimp out support, even if just voicing it.

Buzz, JM, and those boys from Wyoming, along with Wyoming BHA did a lot of heavy lifting. Meat eater jumped in.

An advocate for public land, should advocate, regardless. Part of being an equal opportunity offender. We are talking about a guy who helicoptered in to hunt a piece, so he violated this magical airspace that is being fought over. I'll assume that vid monetized?

Randy is a hell of a good dude, but in this one he missed the mark, BADLY.
 
elks96 said:
HAHA.... So tell me you did not watch any of his videos on Corner Crossing... He has tackled the issue, and while he feels personally that corner crossing should be legal he also is not sure there is a legal path forward... As a result, his legal advisors (lawyers) said it is unlikely that Corner Crossing will ever be legal on a federal level and as a result why would he spend any time on the issue when there are other issues that he can have an impact on...

Oh and heaven forbid a person actually work and get a benefit from the work they have done.... Seriously, tell me with a straight face that you would not take the AZ deal? Seriously jealously is a sad look...
Click to expand...


Like hoss pointed out. I did watch him helicopter in to hunt elk. So did he, does he often film himself breaking the law? Or does he not agree with that whole airspace deal?

Or did he, does he just like the Grey area?

As to the other, I missed the "the following video is a paid advertisement for AZGF". So is he REALLY just enamored with a 20hour drive to shoot ducks and jackrabbit, or does he make infomercials? Why hide the fact that your there under contract if it's not a big deal?
 
hossblur said:
He has a pretty large platform. Would take nothing to pimp out support, even if just voicing it.

Buzz, JM, and those boys from Wyoming, along with Wyoming BHA did a lot of heavy lifting. Meat eater jumped in.

An advocate for public land, should advocate, regardless. Part of being an equal opportunity offender. We are talking about a guy who helicoptered in to hunt a piece, so he violated this magical airspace that is being fought over. I'll assume that vid monetized?

Randy is a hell of a good dude, but in this one he missed the mark, BADLY.
Click to expand...
Again flying in was not a violation as the law is written because there is a set am well defined amount of air space.

What exactly would he have done? Oh am I do ask this, what has Buzz, JM77 Meat Eater all done that has changed the result of the case?

I agree that it is an important topic to have settled, but I really don’t understand where all this has gotten us. Right now the standing was/is exactly as it was before the most recent case. It certainly has not changed the federal laws or policy, it has not even changed the WY laws/policy.

So I am wondering what the end result of this stepping up has been?

Can you explain what exactly he should have been doing? After all this is just one small court case in WY. This is not a major case on a national scale. It certainly is important, but what exactly did BHA, and other do that settled this issue. I get the funding to fight the case was important, but I have not seen a draft legislation in WY to clarify the issue, I have not seen any movement on the federal level?

Is there something I am missing?

I watched his videos and I understood what he was saying. I understand why he chose not to jump in the middle of it. Doesn’t make him a bad guy…
 
andrew12gauge said:
The amount of FCFS tags Randy and his crew have gotten the last couple of years kinda makes a guy wonder if maybe he has a deal with NDOW to promote their products

I always wondered why he pimped Arizona so hard before his deal down their came to light
Click to expand...
Anyone that really thinks Randy or his kid hit the ‘ Add to Cart’ button on those tags needs to wake up.

Rich people don’t play by the same rules, not even people that got rich ‘fighting’ for the little guy.

I know some guys that run a bigger business with lots of admin staff in UT. Thanks to their secretaries, accountants, clerks, etc they have enjoyed 4 deer tags, 2 antelope tags, and a bull elk tag through the NV FCFS in the past 2 years.

It’s just reality and not even worth bothering about. Randy is a rich dude that acts like a rich dude. Can’t blame him for that.

What we can do is make sure that Randy and all other NR hunters aren’t allowed to continue taking tags from NV residents each year. ——SS
 
elks96 said:
Again flying in was not a violation as the law is written because there is a set am well defined amount of air space.

What exactly would he have done? Oh am I do ask this, what has Buzz, JM77 Meat Eater all done that has changed the result of the case?

I agree that it is an important topic to have settled, but I really don’t understand where all this has gotten us. Right now the standing was/is exactly as it was before the most recent case. It certainly has not changed the federal laws or policy, it has not even changed the WY laws/policy.

So I am wondering what the end result of this stepping up has been?

Can you explain what exactly he should have been doing? After all this is just one small court case in WY. This is not a major case on a national scale. It certainly is important, but what exactly did BHA, and other do that settled this issue. I get the funding to fight the case was important, but I have not seen a draft legislation in WY to clarify the issue, I have not seen any movement on the federal level?

Is there something I am missing?

I watched his videos and I understood what he was saying. I understand why he chose not to jump in the middle of it. Doesn’t make him a bad guy…
Click to expand...


You seriously jump to conclusions.

I don't think Randy is a bad guy. I've had disagreement with him, and he's always answered me with his point of view in a stand up way.

He should of been doing what Rinella and crew did. Raise awareness. Raise money, etc.

Buzz has me blocked, and I have been very public about my split from BHA. So I'm not a homer for either. But this case, was the best case I've seen for corner crossing. The best chance we as sportsmen have had.

If we lose we lose. Most likely we will win in court, then the deep pockets will buy a law in legislation. But at least, very least, the issue will be solved. As it stands now, it's dependent on a county, or prosecutor.

I happen to know the Wyoming guys are pissed as hell Randy sat on his ass on this one.

He made a choice, a bad one in my view. He's made others, including showing up at the expo, and doing infomercials for AZGF.

But in a "career" as long as he's had, doing public land advocacy, he done a TON more good than bad.

And, dude has balls. I'm betting eventually he surfaces on this thread. Compare that to Gritty, Hush, MTN Ops, Born and Raised, Cory Jacobsen, and the rest of the Instafamous, DIY public land dudes, and there is no comparison.
 
elks96 said:
Again flying in was not a violation as the law is written because there is a set am well defined amount of air space.

What exactly would he have done? Oh am I do ask this, what has Buzz, JM77 Meat Eater all done that has changed the result of the case?

I agree that it is an important topic to have settled, but I really don’t understand where all this has gotten us. Right now the standing was/is exactly as it was before the most recent case. It certainly has not changed the federal laws or policy, it has not even changed the WY laws/policy.

So I am wondering what the end result of this stepping up has been?

Can you explain what exactly he should have been doing? After all this is just one small court case in WY. This is not a major case on a national scale. It certainly is important, but what exactly did BHA, and other do that settled this issue. I get the funding to fight the case was important, but I have not seen a draft legislation in WY to clarify the issue, I have not seen any movement on the federal level?

Is there something I am missing?

I watched his videos and I understood what he was saying. I understand why he chose not to jump in the middle of it. Doesn’t make him a bad guy…
Click to expand...
You really are a dense one...ask yourself what happens by not fighting the criminal case in Wyoming.

Plus, you don't know what's going on with the issue enough to be making the statements you are.
 
BuzzH said:
You really are a dense one...ask yourself what happens by not fighting the criminal case in Wyoming.

Plus, you don't know what's going on with the issue enough to be making the statements you are.
Click to expand...
Oh no buzz is here to talk down to everyone…

Yes I know what is going on. But instead of answering any questions I proposed. Even if this case is settled here in WY. Will it settle the issue on a national level? No it is a baby step, and ultimately it will not magically create the solution.
If this ever ends up at the Supreme Court, which is likely at some point, I am not optimistic about the outcome.

So again, tell me what difference it would have made either way? Randy took a neutral position. He did not oppose or support corner crossing… So either way what would have done?

It’s ok though we all know that the Biden Hunter Association is on it…
 
elks96 said:
Randy took a neutral position. He did not oppose or support corner crossing…
Click to expand...
I beg to differ. Randy initially took the position that corner crossing was a violation of private property rights. Randy hired lawyers to look into it. One of their conclusions was this case should be in Federal court and looked into as a violation of the UIA. To criticise any one person or group at this stage in this process seems far too premature and honestly very misinformed.

You think this case in question should have already been decided in total? If you believe that, you clearly have lack of understanding as to how the process works.

But, no doubt, if public land users were to get a victory and corner crossing was legal "on the books" after this, I see you plastered all over social media doing it.
 
jm77 said:
I beg to differ. Randy initially took the position that corner crossing was a violation of private property rights. Randy hired lawyers to look into it. One of their conclusions was this case should be in Federal court and looked into as a violation of the UIA. To criticise any one person or group at this stage in this process seems far too premature and honestly very misinformed.

You think this case in question should have already been decided in total? If you believe that, you clearly have lack of understanding as to how the process works.

But, no doubt, if public land users were to get a victory and corner crossing was legal "on the books" after this, I see you plastered all over social media doing it.
Click to expand...
And a year and half ago almost everyone would have said it is illegal on some level. Even if not a violation of WY law, there was still an overwhelming majority of people who felt that this was illegal.

Now as the process continues, we are seeing a hope of that no longer being the case, but for anyone with Randy’s following and his influence to come out on either side there is huge risk. I am not sure about you, but I am not ready at this time to go jump a corner and test it…. So why would he be expected to come out and tell people that corner crossing is legal? He can offer his opinion. Which is what he did, initially he suggested it was illegal, now he is more neutral on it… Where it ends up is up to the court. It is not up to you or me or any social media influencer…
 
elks96 said:
And a year and half ago almost everyone would have said it is illegal on some level. Even if not a violation of WY law, there was still an overwhelming majority of people who felt that this was illegal.

Now as the process continues, we are seeing a hope of that no longer being the case, but for anyone with Randy’s following and his influence to come out on either side there is huge risk. I am not sure about you, but I am not ready at this time to go jump a corner and test it…. So why would he be expected to come out and tell people that corner crossing is legal? He can offer his opinion. Which is what he did, initially he suggested it was illegal, now he is more neutral on it… Where it ends up is up to the court. It is not up to you or me or any social media influencer…
Click to expand...


What's his risk?

He's a DIY, public land hunting content producer, what risk did his platform face?

Randy Newberg private citizen can and should have whatever opinion he wants.


Randy Newberg Hunter, who has created tons of public land advocates(myself included), could have helped raise a chunk of money, and brought media attention.

And what's the downside? We lose, we get no access. That's true now.
 
hossblur said:
What's his risk?

He's a DIY, public land hunting content producer, what risk did his platform face?

Randy Newberg private citizen can and should have whatever opinion he wants.


Randy Newberg Hunter, who has created tons of public land advocates(myself included), could have helped raise a chunk of money, and brought media attention.

And what's the downside? We lose, we get no access. That's true now.
Click to expand...
What do you need the money for?
 
elks96 said:
And a year and half ago almost everyone would have said it is illegal on some level. Even if not a violation of WY law, there was still an overwhelming majority of people who felt that this was illegal.
Click to expand...
That is not remotely true. My best take on what people thought before was over half thought it wasn't illegal.
elks96 said:
Now as the process continues, we are seeing a hope of that no longer being the case, but for anyone with Randy’s following and his influence to come out on either side there is huge risk.
Click to expand...
What? Just exactly what part of "Randy's following" is against access to public land. That comment is quite laughable. Randy's biggest risk was doing what he did and his following going against him. Which many did.
elks96 said:
So why would he be expected to come out and tell people that corner crossing is legal?
Click to expand...
No one expected this. Most expected him to support the cause of the hunters. In other words that it's not illegal.
elks96 said:
I am not sure about you, but I am not ready at this time to go jump a corner and test it….
Click to expand...
Oct 2022 ask this young man about that.
319056476_622277769655308_1586145730526667806_n (1).jpg
 
Is That a Folding Ladder Hid In The Pack?


jm77 said:
That is not remotely true. My best take on what people thought before was over half thought it wasn't illegal.

What? Just exactly what part of "Randy's following" is against access to public land. That comment is quite laughable. Randy's biggest risk was doing what he did and his following going against him. Which many did.

No one expected this. Most expected him to support the cause of the hunters. In other words that it's not illegal.

Oct 2022 ask this young man about that.View attachment 99238
Click to expand...
 
Tristate said:
We got told the lawyers were pro-bono. Does that mean we were being lied to?

I think we need independent accounting on what yall are spending money on? Not only is it not transparent, but it is starting to sound fraudulent.
Click to expand...
I have the accounting for every penny...reconciled by a professional.

You didn't donate a penny and are entitled to nothing.

None of your business.

You weren't told anything from those handling this deal.
 
“Pro bono” does not mean “free.” Even if lawyers take a case pro bono there are still costs associated.

Except if it’s a dinner that never happened with 3 fake lawyers that don’t exist. That probably wouldn’t cost anything but one’s integrity…
 
I hear so many individuals hammer outfitters and guides and organizations for making money off of public resource. Randy is one of the top dogs in making money and a reputation off of a public resource. Yet those same people try and put Randy and others on some sort of pedestal. It makes me chuckle that he has duped so many into thinking he's a voice or the champion of the common hunter.
 
BuzzH said:
I have the accounting for every penny...reconciled by a professional.

You didn't donate a penny and are entitled to nothing.

None of your business.

You weren't told anything from those handling this deal.
Click to expand...
So now you admit it's costing money.

You lied in that other thread then. I was told that by YOU.

Like I said, it's starting to look like fraud.
 
Vanilla said:
“Pro bono” does not mean “free.” Even if lawyers take a case pro bono there are still costs associated.

Except if it’s a dinner that never happened with 3 fake lawyers that don’t exist. That probably wouldn’t cost anything but one’s integrity…
Click to expand...
Why does dinner with lawyers cost "integrity"? Are you saying lawyers are that dirty? Or just the one you can answer for?
 
I am more upset at azgfd than Randy, but not thrilled with Randy either. Between him, Brian Call, and the hushin group they’ve invited the whole world to further decimate AZ’s already precarious deer herds, and that, at the behest of AZGFD.

Now, what was a true otc opportunity is fading fast.
 
anyone in montana notice the change in wording in the regs on corner crossing?
2021 use to slightly ambiguous now 2022 clearly says corner crossing is illegal.
 
Vanilla said:
It doesn’t. Read again and try again.
Click to expand...
How does something that never happened cost anyone anything?

You don't know how logic actually works, do you.

That's why I have to assume you must be accusing lawyers of being integrity killers.
 
Tristate said:
How does something that never happened cost anyone anything?

You don't know how logic actually works, do you.

That's why I have to assume you must be accusing lawyers of being integrity killers.
Click to expand...
Logical people don’t assume. Stew on that one a while.
 
Tristate said:
So now you admit it's costing money.

You lied in that other thread then. I was told that by YOU.

Like I said, it's starting to look like fraud.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you have read about this, the defense of the four hunters in the criminal case was not pro bono. The lawyer in the civil case has offered pro bono if funds don't hold up. Other lawyers also have offered pro bono for related services to this case.

You're talking about things you are poorly informed on or just don't take the time to read or find out about.
 
jm77 said:
I'm not sure what you have read about this, the defense of the four hunters in the criminal case was not pro bono. The lawyer in the civil case has offered pro bono if funds don't hold up. Other lawyers also have offered pro bono for related services to this case.

You're talking about things you are poorly informed on or just don't take the time to read or find out about.
Click to expand...
I had a specific conversation on another thread with Buzzh in regards to blowing money, that could be used more effectively, on the lawsuit in an effort to set precedent on conversation crossing. Buzzh claimed it didn't cost anything because it was pro-bono.

I know exactly what I am talking about because I was half of the people in the conversation.

Now other people are talking about Randy should be raising funds for that fight.
 
Tristate said:
I had a specific conversation on another thread with Buzzh in regards to blowing money, that could be used more effectively, on the lawsuit in an effort to set precedent on conversation crossing. Buzzh claimed it didn't cost anything because it was pro-bono.

I know exactly what I am talking about because I was half of the people in the conversation.

Now other people are talking about Randy should be raising funds for that fight.
Click to expand...
The other thread please?
 
Tristate said:
I had a specific conversation on another thread with Buzzh in regards to blowing money, that could be used more effectively, on the lawsuit in an effort to set precedent on conversation crossing. Buzzh claimed it didn't cost anything because it was pro-bono.

I know exactly what I am talking about because I was half of the people in the conversation.

Now other people are talking about Randy should be raising funds for that fight.
Click to expand...
You have no idea what you're talking about.

Why if there were no costs associated with the criminal and civil cases would there be a need to raise funds?

You should try hooked on phonics...you're comprehension is as poor as your understanding of the corner crossing case.
 
BuzzH said:
You have no idea what you're talking about.

Why if there were no costs associated with the criminal and civil cases would there be a need to raise funds?

You should try hooked on phonics...you're comprehension is as poor as your understanding of the corner crossing case.
Click to expand...
My reading comprehension is fine. But you and your boys need to get your stories straight before your crusade starts looking like a fraudulent money grab.
 
BuzzH said:
You might want to consider the definition of libel...
Click to expand...
I know what the definition is. You might want to start getting your story straight with the keyboard warriors around here.

Go talk to the guys saying you needed Randy's funds.
 
Tristate said:
I know what the definition is. You might want to start getting your story straight with the keyboard warriors around here.

Go talk to the guys saying you needed Randy's funds.
Click to expand...
My story has been straight from the start and with the appropriate folks involved in the corner crossing case.

That's all you need to know.
 
Tristate said:
I know what the definition is. You might want to start getting your story straight with the keyboard warriors around here.

Go talk to the guys saying you needed Randy's funds.
Click to expand...
Says the biggest keyboard warrior here. Your Napoleon syndrome is flaring up again lil guy.
 
BuzzH said:
My story has been straight from the start and with the appropriate folks involved in the corner crossing case.

That's all you need to know.
Click to expand...
Good then go threaten the guys that are saying you need Randy's money with libel.
 
jm77 said:
Gossip.

Keep trying to make the narrative fit your gossip. You're looking more brilliant by the minute!:ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Yall don't even have a narrative. It's 5 dudes with 5 different stories all acting like they know everything. It's all totally worthless gossip.
 
vansterdam123 said:
Randy Newberg acquires TWO Nevada turn back Antelope buck tags for BOTH him and his son in 2022. A very generous turn back program for non-residents of Nevada and lightning strikes the Newbergs twice.
Click to expand...
It's hardly "lightning striking" twice. I cleared my calendar, deprived myself of sleep, and put my life on hold so I could also get my turn back tags. If you're a persistent SOB, your have decent chances.
 
Tristate said:
Good then go threaten the guys that are saying you need Randy's money with libel.
Click to expand...
We currently have all the money we need from over 2100 generous donations from individuals and businesses.

That is something that myself, WYBHA, the 4 hunters from MO, and several others that have access to the funding are very thankful for.

We've also promised accounting for all of it and we have a professional accountant that has reconciled all the income, expenses, and bank statements.

What you've stated in writing is that somehow there is fraud with the fundraising.

That's an insult to those involved with the case, all of whom have not only donated their money, but thousands of hours of volunteer hours to same. They are all accountable, honest, and have access to all the books.

Time to grow up Cromeens...you can disagree with the cause/case but libeling those involved with fraud is crossing the line.
 
BuzzH said:
We currently have all the money we need from over 2100 generous donations from individuals and businesses.

That is something that myself, WYBHA, the 4 hunters from MO, and several others that have access to the funding are very thankful for.

We've also promised accounting for all of it and we have a professional accountant that has reconciled all the income, expenses, and bank statements.

What you've stated in writing is that somehow there is fraud with the fundraising.

That's an insult to those involved with the case, all of whom have not only donated their money, but thousands of hours of volunteer hours to same. They are all accountable, honest, and have access to all the books.

Time to grow up Cromeens...you can disagree with the cause/case but libeling those involved with fraud is crossing the line.
Click to expand...
Now that is libel because I never did say it was fraud.

I said other people on here were saying things that contradicted what you had stated on a different thread. I told you to get your story straight with them or it starts to look like fraud.

If anything they libeled your cause but you don't seem to care because it was an attack at me.
 
I'll cut you a deal Buzzh. You post right here where I said you engaged in fraud and I leave MM for good.
 
Tristate said:
I'll cut you a deal Buzzh. You post right here where I said you engaged in fraud and I leave MM for good.
Click to expand...
When you find yourself in hole, quit digging...or as my late Grandfather used to say, "don't let your alligator mouth over-ride your canary a$$".

Everyone is well aware of what you wrote.
 
BuzzH said:
When you find yourself in hole, quit digging...or as my late Grandfather used to say, "don't let your alligator mouth over-ride your canary a$$".

Everyone is well aware of what you wrote.
Click to expand...
Post it.

Here's your chance.

Did you actually lie and accuse me of something I didn't do?

Do everyone a favor and get rid of me.
 
Tristate said:
Post it.

Here's your chance.

Did you actually lie and accuse me of something I didn't do?

Do everyone a favor and get rid of me.
Click to expand...
I'm disinclined to insult the good folks on MM by reposting what you wrote...they can read.

Its not my desire to get rid of anyone, my desire is to inform the hunting/fishing/ and public land recreationists, with the facts of what's transpiring on the most significant public land access issue in at least the past 40-50 years.

That simple.

If you disagree with the way its being handled fine.

If you don't agree that public land access is important fine.

A vast majority do approve of our efforts, they do think public land access is important, and frankly, those are the folks we're doing this for.

It's not about you Cromeens...as much as you would like it be.
 
Last edited:
BuzzH said:
I'm disinclined to insult the good folks on MM by reposting what you wrote...they can read.

Its not my desire to get rid of anyone, my desire is to inform the hunting public with the facts of what's transpiring on the most significant public land access issue in at least the past 40-50 years.

That simple.
Click to expand...
That's what I thought.

It never happened. You can't post it. That simple.

It's like the time you came after me for killing too many coyotes on a weekend line that wasn't a weekend. You sir need to quit being so anxious to attack me.

Go attack the guys for libel that said you needed Randy's money.
 
Tristate said:
That's what I thought.

It never happened. You can't post it. That simple.

It's like the time you came after me for killing too many coyotes on a weekend line that wasn't a weekend. You sir need to quit being so anxious to attack me.

Go attack the guys for libel that said you needed Randy's money.
Click to expand...
You don't "think" and that's your problem.

I'm strongly encouraging you to let this one go, you're in over your head.
 
BuzzH said:
You don't "think" and that's your problem.

I'm strongly encouraging you to let this one go, you're in over your head.
Click to expand...

"There are law professors and a few dozen attorneys working this case pro bono on behalf of the Missouri-4 and public access."


That's what you said. You said it. On the other thread. No editing. Then other people said Randy should have contributed his clout and funds to the cause.
 
Tristate said:
Okay. So go deal with the guys that claim you need Randy's money for your crusade.

Or do you need Randy's money for your crusade?
Click to expand...
Currently, over 2100 individuals/businesses have contributed money for the legal fees of the Missouri-4 to defend them on criminal (successfully) and civil charges.

Those contributions are adequate at this time to cover the expenses/legal fees of both cases. All of which was fully explained on the gofundme.

Not complicated.
 
BuzzH said:
Currently, over 2100 individuals/businesses have contributed money for the legal fees of the Missouri-4 to defend them on criminal (successfully) and civil charges.

Those contributions are adequate at this time to cover the expenses/legal fees of both cases. All of which was fully explained on the gofundme.

Not complicated.
Click to expand...
So where does the money go if a dozen lawyers are working on it pro-bono?

Who set up the fund and can access it?
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_20231010_182625865_HDR.jpg
268A8E03-7F56-4B2B-90D8-614523DC731B.jpeg
P1180200 - Copy4.JPG
2.JPG
C58CA0EA-37AF-4D31-8ABC-DF535D7811B0.jpeg
20210805_142636.jpg
brianlatturner92618-11.jpg
IMG_20160926_133525.jpg
Kickers Off Both Sides Mule Deer
Bull2.jpg
IMG_3612.JPG
08271E18-BE85-44E1-A292-91D34D4C6024.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom