One of the State of Jefferson movements is legitimate, one is not. They are mutually exclusive. Which one is real and which one is authentic?
In case you have not been following the State of Jefferson movement, one should know that it a desperate attempt on the part of nearly two dozen counties in S. Oregon and N. California to break away from the clutches of the BLM and the EPA. When they are not stealing rancher land (e.g. Bundy) to facilitate the sale of uranium to the Russians for Hillary Clinton, they are simply trying to drive an entire population of farmers and ranchers off of their land, in the name of Agenda 21, and the people have had enough. The people are attempting to break away from the two states and form a 51st state so they can gain a measure of protection against the corrupt EPA and BLM that the state governments of California and Oregon are not providing. The breakaway is an administrative process which is legal that ultimately requires 33 states to ratify the move.
Two State of Jefferson Movements
The movement to save the land and fortunes of the impacted population has bifurcated into two camps. One one side are the elected officials, the present County Supervisors. They go by the title, Council of County Representatives. They are pursuing a legal path to statehood. The leadership can be characterized as low-keyed and a group that is following the correct administrative path to statehood in order to protect its people.
The second group is pursuing a reckless course of action by suing the state of California for non-representation. From a legal perspective, a lawsuit such as this, cannot achieve statehood unto itself. From my perspective, these people are wasting the financial resources for the movement. They have raised over $300,000 on their way to a goal of a million dollars. The people will not get their money back and even if the lawsuit is successful, and it will not be, the area will be no closer to statehood because this is a not a proven path to pursue.