Shouldn't the Oath Keepers have stood in the way of the first and second incarceration of the Hammonds?

Only if the Hammonds became rebellious?

The Hammonds, whom are basing their decisions on fear of possible death, and further hardship to their family, if they were to take a stand?

Not going against the will of another is basic human respect. So is the ability to recognize when someone is terrified, like a deer in the headlights.

It appears Oath Keepers are typical Oaf Policy-ers, with the inability to see the forest through the trees.

How can the Hammonds work their land if they are already in jail? Or are they to be considered a lost cause?

Does taking over the office that was being used to screw over the ranchers, nip in the bud, any further coordinated attacks upon the ranchers, by the BLM?

The further upstream you go, to find the source of the problems, the less damage control you have to perform.

Why spend the man hours to guard a dispersed targeted population, when you can take out the "leader" of the abusers?

Is that beyond the comprehension of Oaf Policy-ers?

Paper work is what pencil pushers use, because there are people with TITLES OF NOBILITY (lawyers) holding "public" office that shouldn't be.

Paper work and manipulation of the perception of the population, under color of law, is how all this unconstitutional crap was born.

Throwing a monkey wrench into the shyster's machine of plunder is a logical response.