• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Civil Forfeiture

Trump Does Not Know What Civil Forfeiture Is, but He Likes It

Trump: So what do you do? So in other words, they have a huge stash of drugs. So in the old days, you take it. Now we're criticized if we take it. So who gets it? What happens to it? Tell them to keep it?
Click to expand...

Eventually Trump seems to get that it's money (or other assets) the cops are taking, but he still assumes it's money lying next to a huge stash of drugs—as opposed to, say, the savings of a hapless college student, the winnings of innocent poker players, or the bank account of a convenience store owner whose deposits the IRS deemed suspiciously small. Trump is baffled as to why anyone would want to stop the cops from taking drug dealers' profits.

Aubrey and Boente, who obviously know better, are not about to enlighten Trump, since they both have a financial interest in promoting forfeiture, which helps fund their budgets. Aubrey leaves the impression that it's only bad guys who lose their property, saying anyone who claims otherwise is just "mak[ing] up stories." Boente leaves the reasons for the "pressure" and "criticism" utterly mysterious. And when Trump asks a roomful of cops and prosecutors if they "even understand the other side of it," it is hardly surprising that no one pipes up to explain the critics' arguments. By the time Rockwall County, Texas, Sheriff Harold Eavenson mentions a state senator "who was talking about introducing legislation to require conviction before we can receive their forfeiture," Trump is automatically outraged: "Can you believe that?" It's the greedy leading the blind.
Click to expand...
 
Notice how silent "libertarians" get when you talk about civil forfeiture. It's part of the dirty bargain they'd made with conservatives to cut taxes.
 
DeaconSig said:
This is the guy you believe is going to make America great again, knowell.
Click to expand...

I strongly disagree with the Donald on this. Unfortunately neither party has done anything to help. It has been on my radar for decades and seems like the most un-American of ideas. I am well aware that Trump will not help with this. I would have thought that Dems like Obama may have been better but none have acted to stop this.

As far as I can tell, only Libertarian candidates have championed the removal of civil forfeiture. We have yet to crack 1-2%. I think we could have gotten 5-10% this year with a candidate who at least pretended to give a damn. Would have been an interesting year for Paul the elder to have run.
 
PhDeac said:
Notice how silent "libertarians" get when you talk about civil forfeiture. It's part of the dirty bargain they'd made with conservatives to cut taxes.
Click to expand...

Am I too slow on the draw for you, PH? No Libertarian that I know of would be okay with cutting taxes and raising funds this way.
 
knowell said:
I strongly disagree with the Donald on this. Unfortunately neither party has done anything to help. It has been on my radar for decades and seems like the most un-American of ideas. I am well aware that Trump will not help with this. I would have thought that Dems like Obama may have been better but none have acted to stop this.

As far as I can tell, only Libertarian candidates have championed the removal of civil forfeiture. We have yet to crack 1-2%. I think we could have gotten 5-10% this year with a candidate who at least pretended to give a damn. Would have been an interesting year for Paul the elder to have run.
Click to expand...

Quick to praise, slow to condemn. Seems about right.

Congrats on being right about civil forfeiture, however.
 
Count me as another against Civil Forfeiture. Cash != drugs, property is property - not an entity (as seen in the ridiculous sounding lawsuits), and the practice too easily lends itself to abuse, self-aggrandizement, and conflicts of interest.
 
DeaconSig said:
Quick to praise, slow to condemn.
Click to expand...

You should try it. It's a better way to go through life than the reverse.

Makes it hard to get worked up for constant protests, if that's your thing.
 
Jeff Sessions wants police to take more cash from American citizens

Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday said he'd be issuing a new directive this week aimed at increasing police seizures of cash and property.

“We hope to issue this week a new directive on asset forfeiture — especially for drug traffickers,” Sessions said in his prepared remarks for a speech to the National District Attorney's Association in Minneapolis. "With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures. No criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime. Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate as is sharing with our partners."
Click to expand...

In his speech Monday, Attorney General Sessions appeared to specifically call out adoptive forfeitures as an area for potential expansion. “Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate,” he said, “as is sharing with our partners.”

“This is a federalism issue,” Johnson said. “Any return to federal adoptive forfeitures would “circumvent limitations on civil forfeiture that are imposed by state legislatures … the Department of Justice is saying 'we're going to help state and local law enforcement to get around those reforms.'”
Click to expand...
 
 
Which constituency wants more asset forfeiture?
 
Let's see if Mike Lee will put his legislative oversight rights and bill-writing ability where his mouth is. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/jeff-sessions-treads-on-the-property-rights-of-americans/533979/ He sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and the subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights. Maybe Ole Jeffy needs to appear before that subcommittee to defend this action. Or maybe the Pubs in Congress will continue to cower before the minions of the Tweeter In Chief.
 
Deacon923 said:
Let's see if Mike Lee will put his legislative oversight rights and bill-writing ability where his mouth is. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/jeff-sessions-treads-on-the-property-rights-of-americans/533979/ He sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee and the subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights. Maybe Ole Jeffy needs to appear before that subcommittee to defend this action. Or maybe the Pubs in Congress will continue to cower before the minions of the Tweeter In Chief.
Click to expand...

I think you know he won't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top