Another one of Trump's victims - see video

[tailfins]

A pattern of sleaze:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGWqKkzmJXw

[jimnyc]

He tried for what the law allowed. Perhaps the government or states should outright ban the use of eminent domain if they don't expect people to use it, or try to succeed in court with it.

Folks were dead silent on this issue about GWB, who took 13 acres and not one little home for a parking lot. This didn't become a huge deal until it was Trump. If someone complained about Bush in the past elections as a reason to avoid voting for him - I apologize to those people and give them credit for being consistent. My searches don't find any of that though.

[fj1200]

He tried for what the law allowed. Perhaps the government or states should outright ban the use of eminent domain if they don't expect people to use it, or try to succeed in court with it.

Folks were dead silent on this issue about GWB, who took 13 acres and not one little home for a parking lot. This didn't become a huge deal until it was Trump. If someone complained about Bush in the past elections as a reason to avoid voting for him - I apologize to those people and give them credit for being consistent. My searches don't find any of that though.

Did you search all the way back to 1991? And Kelo was a huge deal when it came out. Of course I wasn't posting much in 2005. My bad.

[Kathianne]

Did you search all the way back to 1991? And Kelo was a huge deal when it came out. Of course I wasn't posting much in 2005. My bad.

I was, but it was a different board then. Even here though, you'll find I posted a bit, (;) ) on it way before Trump brouhaha.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/search.php?searchid=25263

[jimnyc]

Did you search all the way back to 1991? And Kelo was a huge deal when it came out. Of course I wasn't posting much in 2005. My bad.

Why would you say my bad? Did someone mention your name or point you out? But if eminent domain was such a huge issue for folks, one would think that we would have had a bunch of discussion on this in the past, and complaints from folks. We simply didn't. Hell, even in 2000 and 2004 it wasn't a huge deal in those elections for GWB. His past use of it in Texas showed that he would be reckless too with it, and that we shouldn't vote for someone that uses it - as they may get in office and place limitations on it! :laugh:

[jimnyc]

I was, but it was a different board then. Even here though, you'll find I posted a bit, (;) ) on it way before Trump brouhaha.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/search.php?searchid=25263

Not sure why FJ is thanking you, your link doesn't work. :)

[Kathianne]

Why would you say my bad? Did someone mention your name or point you out? But if eminent domain was such a huge issue for folks, one would think that we would have had a bunch of discussion on this in the past, and complaints from folks. We simply didn't. Hell, even in 2000 and 2004 it wasn't a huge deal in those elections for GWB. His past use of it in Texas showed that he would be reckless too with it, and that we shouldn't vote for someone that uses it - as they may get in office and place limitations on it! :laugh:


I've got a link to old site of my posts from there. Don't want to refer, but it's available. ;)

[Kathianne]

Not sure why FJ is thanking you, your link doesn't work. :)

Advanced search: kelo; Kathianne; ascending order. ;)

[fj1200]

Why would you say my bad? Did someone mention your name or point you out? But if eminent domain was such a huge issue for folks, one would think that we would have had a bunch of discussion on this in the past, and complaints from folks. We simply didn't. Hell, even in 2000 and 2004 it wasn't a huge deal in those elections for GWB. His past use of it in Texas showed that he would be reckless too with it, and that we shouldn't vote for someone that uses it - as they may get in office and place limitations on it! :laugh:

Because I clearly missed my opportunity to point out that ED abuses are wrong. My bad. And of course you ignore that few are stating that trump will be using ED left and right but it shows his attitude with government power. At least Bush wasn't praising government seizures of private property:


On June 23, 2006, the first anniversary of the original decision, President (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States) George W. Bush (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) issued an executive order (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order_(United_States))[31] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London#cite_note-georgewbush-whitehouse-31) instructing the federal government to restrict the use of eminent domain
...for the purpose of benefiting the general public and not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken.[31] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London#cite_note-georgewbush-whitehouse-31)
However, since eminent domain is most often exercised by local and state governments, the presidential order may thus have little overall effect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London#Presidential_reaction

[jimnyc]

I've got a link to old site of my posts from there. Don't want to refer, but it's available. ;)

I followed your search here, Kelo stuff, but not condemning Bush for it. Not sure what you posted elsewhere, but I would certainly take your word for it if you say you did in fact condemn Bush for it equally.

As for being against it in general, that's cool that you posted about it in the past. I don't recall a lot of discussions, or any at all, but I do stand corrected!

[fj1200]

Not sure why FJ is thanking you, your link doesn't work. :)

Because I thank people who are consistent in viewpoint.

[Kathianne]

I followed your search here, Kelo stuff, but not condemning Bush for it. Not sure what you posted elsewhere, but I would certainly take your word for it if you say you did in fact condemn Bush for it equally.

As for being against it in general, that's cool that you posted about it in the past. I don't recall a lot of discussions, or any at all, but I do stand corrected!

Now I get you, I do believe I said that you and Trump were correct the other day regarding the Rangers, even posted the ESPN link. Yes, it was Trump saying, "so did he!" that brought the Ranger's Park misuse to light for me, and I agree it's the same bad.

My point was, my interest and viewpoint on Kelo/eminent domain did not start just to be against Trump. The posts speak to THAT.

[jimnyc]

Because I clearly missed my opportunity to point out that ED abuses are wrong. My bad. And of course you ignore that few are stating that trump will be using ED left and right but it shows his attitude with government power. At least Bush wasn't praising government seizures of private property:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London#Presidential_reaction

No, Bush didn't praise it, he just made MILLIONS down the road off of the Rangers. And then of course, since it showed his attitude towards government power, he used that power to then limit things on eminent domain.

But if it's 100% legal - how can it be an abuse of power in any way whatsoever?

And do you truly have an issue when used for highways, hospitals, schools and such? Because that's what Trump praised.

[jimnyc]

Now I get you, I do believe I said that you and Trump were correct the other day regarding the Rangers, even posted the ESPN link. Yes, it was Trump saying, "so did he!" that brought the Ranger's Park misuse to light for me, and I agree it's the same bad.

My point was, my interest and viewpoint on Kelo/eminent domain did not start just to be against Trump. The posts speak to THAT.

There was a LOT more than Trump pointing out the disparity. Hell, if it were such a concern, people wouldn't need to investigate today, they would have known from the prior 2 elections when his attitude on government power was exposed.

[fj1200]

No, Bush didn't praise it, he just made MILLIONS down the road off of the Rangers. And then of course, since it showed his attitude towards government power, he used that power to then limit things on eminent domain.

But if it's 100% legal - how can it be an abuse of power in any way whatsoever?

And do you truly have an issue when used for highways, hospitals, schools and such? Because that's what Trump praised.

Trump agreed with Kelo 100%. Nobody here that I've seen has opposed ED for highways, etc.


In 2005, however, Trump was delighted to find that the Supreme Court had okayed the brand of government-abetted theft that he’d twice attempted. “I happen to agree with it 100 percent,” he told Fox News’s Neil Cavuto of the Kelo decision.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/265171/donald-trump-and-eminent-domain-robert-verbruggen

It's an attitude of government power that I find concerning; that government can make better decisions.

[Kathianne]

There was a LOT more than Trump pointing out the disparity. Hell, if it were such a concern, people wouldn't need to investigate today, they would have known from the prior 2 elections when his attitude on government power was exposed.

and that is not my fault, when I heard that, I started searching.

I knew about Trump and the limo parking lot way before he flipped to GOP. I can't help what the media covered and didn't back when.

[Kathianne]

Trump agreed with Kelo 100%. Nobody here that I've seen has opposed ED for highways, etc.



It's an attitude of government power that I find concerning; that government can make better decisions.

and as both the Bush and Trump attempts, successful or not, it's only the rich that would benefit under their ideas of ED.

[NightTrain]

Honestly, the issue of ED is really a non-issue for me.

Terrorism, Economy, Illegals, Debt and Taxes are my main concerns.

[fj1200]

and as both the Bush and Trump attempts, successful or not, it's only the rich that would benefit under their ideas of ED.

True. And stadium deals are generally a bad deal for the general public anyway.

[fj1200]

Honestly, the issue of ED is really a non-issue for me.

Terrorism, Economy, Illegals, Debt and Taxes are my main concerns.

It's just another drip IMO.

[Kathianne]

True. And stadium deals are generally a bad deal for the general public anyway.

Right. Not everyone can or would choose to go to ballgame, casino, etc. Things like hospitals, schools, roads, oil pipelines are there for 'the public.' While some with choose to not go to doctors, homeschool their kids, walk or get off the grid in otherways; the venues are open to them-as much to everyone else.

[jimnyc]

and that is not my fault, when I heard that, I started searching.

I knew about Trump and the limo parking lot way before he flipped to GOP. I can't help what the media covered and didn't back when.

Do you not care about the "flips" of other candidates?

The media did cover it - I just don't think it was as "big" of news back then. I know the Dems tried to capitalize on it but obviously it didn't go very far.

[jimnyc]

And I might add that one of these folks made MILLIONS off of their deal, while the other made nothing.

[fj1200]

And I might add that one of these folks made MILLIONS off of their deal, while the other made nothing.

The stadium was built by Arlington. Bush made his money off the Rangers.

[Kathianne]

Do you not care about the "flips" of other candidates?

The media did cover it - I just don't think it was as "big" of news back then. I know the Dems tried to capitalize on it but obviously it didn't go very far.

Yes, I believe that was covered in the Romney election cycle? Yes, other candidates 'changes of mind' do matter as points of reference.

It's the overwhelming number of them, the strength he said he held them then and now. He has made many fragments of ideas, that tend to make one wonder which he holds now. Then that's just me, hearing what I want to hear.

You don't hear the same, I must be wrong.

We do each have our right to be wrong.

[tailfins]

and that is not my fault, when I heard that, I started searching.

I knew about Trump and the limo parking lot way before he flipped to GOP. I can't help what the media covered and didn't back when.

Put Eminent Domain together with him greasing the palms of Atlantic City Democrats amounts to borderline corruption. What do you suppose Trump would do with the IRS? Abolishing it DOESN'T come to mind.

[jimnyc]

The stadium was built by Arlington. Bush made his money off the Rangers.

Which obviously made money by the building of a new stadium - in which he was an owner. Without a 200 million dollar stadium, the value of the team doesn't increase the way it did. Bush's investment of 600k went to 15 million prior to selling.

I would think a group of owners using it to get a new stadium and then line their pockets - is a little worse than someone trying to remove someone from a lone home in order to expand on a property in AC.

[fj1200]

Which obviously made money by the building of a new stadium - in which he was an owner. Without a 200 million dollar stadium, the value of the team doesn't increase the way it did. Bush's investment of 600k went to 15 million prior to selling.

I would think a group of owners using it to get a new stadium and then line their pockets - is a little worse than someone trying to remove someone from a lone home in order to expand on a property in AC.

It's pretty much a surety that they would have gotten a stadium somewhere. As I said, stadiums are bad deals for the general public. Kelo was in CT.

Wow, a blame Bush thread. I thought we were done with those.

[jimnyc]

Yes, I believe that was covered in the Romney election cycle? Yes, other candidates 'changes of mind' do matter as points of reference.

It's the overwhelming number of them, the strength he said he held them then and now. He has made many fragments of ideas, that tend to make one wonder which he holds now. Then that's just me, hearing what I want to hear.

You don't hear the same, I must be wrong.

We do each have our right to be wrong.

It was discussed in both 2000 and 2004, during the Bush election cycles, as the Dems were trying to use this as a talking point.

[Kathianne]

Which obviously made money by the building of a new stadium - in which he was an owner. Without a 200 million dollar stadium, the value of the team doesn't increase the way it did. Bush's investment of 600k went to 15 million prior to selling.

I would think a group of owners using it to get a new stadium and then line their pockets - is a little worse than someone trying to remove someone from a lone home in order to expand on a property in AC.

I'm confused. I thought you said the issue didn't matter to you?

I thought you kinda like GW back when, now the Kelo type deal with Rangers bothers you so much in 2016?

That one old lady was involved in not wanting to sell to Trump, makes it ok for a Kelo type attempt? What if it had been your mom or mine? Now personally, I don't care if he was trying to get psychoblues home, while anyone who knew him might be happy he was having a hard time from the most dazzling deal maker ever, it would still be wrong, imo.

[Kathianne]

It was discussed in both 2000 and 2004, during the Bush election cycles, as the Dems were trying to use this as a talking point.

I believe you, I certainly missed it, probably because I wasn't listening too much to the Dems talking points?

[jimnyc]

It's pretty much a surety that they would have gotten a stadium somewhere. As I said, stadiums are bad deals for the general public. Kelo was in CT.

Wow, a blame Bush thread. I thought we were done with those.

Bush isn't being blamed for anything? Simply pointing out the similarities.

[fj1200]

Bush isn't being blamed for anything? Simply pointing out the similarities.

Yup, similarities. Not a conservative notch for trump.

[jimnyc]

I'm confused. I thought you said the issue didn't matter to you?

I thought you kinda like GW back when, now the Kelo type deal with Rangers bothers you so much in 2016?

That one old lady was involved in not wanting to sell to Trump, makes it ok for a Kelo type attempt? What if it had been your mom or mine? Now personally, I don't care if he was trying to get psychoblues home, while anyone who knew him might be happy he was having a hard time from the most dazzling deal maker ever, it would still be wrong, imo.

It doesn't, I don't think he can nor will do anything whatsoever with eminent domain if he becomes president. Nor do I think his past use of is somehow indicative of future abuse of government power. Nor did I say I dislike Bush or anything like that. I'm pointing out similarities is all. I don't have an issue with Bush nor Trump.

[jimnyc]

Yup, similarities. Not a conservative notch for trump.

Not sure anyone said it was? I just see no issue with it at all. Are folks out there using this somehow to make him look like a better conservative?

[jimnyc]

I believe you, I certainly missed it, probably because I wasn't listening too much to the Dems talking points?

Usually the talking points of both sides end up in the media.

But if it's a 'non-conservative' thing to do, why wouldn't it have been addressed by conservatives during such elections? Why would eminent domain be a talking point back then for the Dems and not republicans?

[Kathianne]

Usually the talking points of both sides end up in the media.

But if it's a 'non-conservative' thing to do, why wouldn't it have been addressed by conservatives during such elections? Why would eminent domain be a talking point back then for the Dems and not republicans?

I don't have an answer for you on any front. I read as much or even more back then as I do now. Kelo came in 2006, maybe the TX thing would not have caused much national news? I don't know in all honesty.

[fj1200]

Not sure anyone said it was? I just see no issue with it at all. Are folks out there using this somehow to make him look like a better conservative?

Just a clarification; you agree with trump on Kelo or it's not an important issue today?


But if it's a 'non-conservative' thing to do, why wouldn't it have been addressed by conservatives during such elections? Why would eminent domain be a talking point back then for the Dems and not republicans?

A private entity didn't do the TX stadium deal; it was a quasi-governmental agency and it was signed by a Dem to boot. And I believe it was addressed by conservatives during elections, Bush signed an EO and various states outlawed Kelo type seizures.