Think The New Civil Forfeiture Rules Are Great?

[revelarts]

Trump always seemed to ASSUME more authority than he has then backs off when he realizes ...is told... that it's illegal or unconstitutional. or sees if can get away with it practically and with political support.

Sad.

the constitution is not his guiding star.
It's his own idea of "getting things done" what HE wants done..

[revelarts]

[Kathianne]

Trump always seemed to ASSUME more authority than he has then backs off when he realizes ...is told... that it's illegal or unconstitutional. or sees if can get away with it practically and with political support.

Sad.

the constitution is not his guiding star.
It's his own idea of "getting things done" what HE wants done..

That is what I think too. He doesn't have an interest in the 'system' and how it is supposed to work or even really how it does. He wants to run the presidency as he ran his company and I think there's a serious deficit in his understanding of the differences. I honestly believe he thinks he's being pragmatic and acting through 'commonsense.' The problem is he thinks his judgement is good enough and perhaps it is for his core, but not so much the rest.

In any case, even today there are constraints upon the executive as Obama and now Trump are finding out. Indeed, Obama was more able to finesse the system because he didn't alienate most of the electorate, though did as good as Trump when it came to Congress.

[revelarts]

That is what I think too. He doesn't have an interest in the 'system' and how it is supposed to work or even really how it does. He wants to run the presidency as he ran his company and I think there's a serious deficit in his understanding of the differences. I honestly believe he thinks he's being pragmatic and acting through 'commonsense.' The problem is he thinks his judgement is good enough and perhaps it is for his core, but not so much the rest.

In any case, even today there are constraints upon the executive as Obama and now Trump are finding out. Indeed, Obama was more able to finesse the system because he didn't alienate most of the electorate, though did as good as Trump when it came to Congress.

Well i think you have i idea of what i think about a lot of "the system". It's bad enough. But Trump Obama and Bush all crossed the sytems muddled and illegal lines as well as ignored the clear more restrictive Constitution.

Obama finessed where he could and at least UNDERSTOOD the boundaries he was crossing. Bush had SOME idea here and there, Cheney absolutely knew, and even stated his intent not to have the executive bound.

Trump doesn't seem to have much of a clue about the Constitution or the federal system.
But He's a good salesman and entertaining TV personality though.
though

[NightTrain]

Obama finessed where he could and at least UNDERSTOOD the boundaries he was crossing.

?

Bush had SOME idea here and there,

wtf?

Cheney absolutely knew, and even stated his intent not to have the executive bound.

Dude? Seriously, wtf.

Trump doesn't seem to have much of a clue about the Constitution or the federal system.
But He's a good salesman and entertaining TV personality though.
though

???

[revelarts]

I didn't stutter.

Obama knew what the Constitution said and what it meant.
He chose to ignore it when he wanted to or pretend it said something he KNEW it didn't intend.
Examples:
Engaging in Libya without congress.
Making up immigration laws by executive order
Spying on U.S citizens without warrents
Killing U.S citizens without trial
to start a list

Bush, well it's hard to know what he really did or didn't know
But he defended his unconstituional acts in various speaches written for him and never did much but repeat the catch phrases and crack jokes (and pass questions off to Chenny Rumsfeild or the the AG) when asked to eleborate by reporters.
Examples:
Spying on U.S citizens without warrents
Torturing terrorist SUSPECTS in custody
Imprisioning people without trial or due process of law
His own set of Executive Orders and Unconstitutional "Signing statements"
To start the list...

CHeney -sheesh - he doesn't care about hte constitution or the 3 branches having CO-EQUAL powers, he wanted the president to have the last word.

Pres. GEORGE H.W. BUSH: This will not stand, this aggression against Kuwait.
NARRATOR: As secretary of defense, Cheney argued the president should not seek congressional authorization for the Gulf war.
Rep. MICKEY EDWARDS (R-OK), 1977-'92: The leadership in Congress generally was telling the first President Bush, "You have to get permission from Congress to go into the Gulf war." The president didn't think that was the case. He resisted it.
RICHARD CHENEY, Fmr. Defense Secretary: [FRONTLINE 1996] I argued that we did not need congressional authorization, and that legally and from a constitutional standpoint, we had all the authority we needed.
JACK GOLDSMITH: Secretary of Defense Cheney's advice was that it was unnecessary and imprudent- unnecessary because the Constitution did not require it, imprudent because Congress might say no.
RICHARD CHENEY: [FRONTLINE 1996] If we'd lost the vote in the Congress, I would certainly have recommended to the president that we go forward anyway.

Read this interview with David Gergan to see what i'm talking about

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ws/gergen.html

I paid a lot of attention to what he's said thorugh the years myself. I have no need to make stuff up. Chenney beleives in an imperial presidency NOT a CO-Equal constitutional one like the founders designed.
He KNEW EXCATLY what he was doing.


TRUMP,
C'mon NT, Trump seems to know NOTHING about the constitution. Every time he comments on it he seems wrong or litereally mentions that HE'S BEEN TOLD that he Can't do XYZ.
Or just Bluffs his way through with hand waving and assurances that what he's going to do WILL be constitutional, despite the fact that what he JUST SAID is UNconstitutional.

I'm just calling it like i see it.
If you can show me quotes of Trump speaking for more than 30 sec COGENTLY about the constitution or the constitutional role of the executive branch I'd like to see it. ANd i'll change my opinion some.

If not I stand by my statement.

sorry if the concept hits you like it's from left field.
BUt NO one can HONESTLY that the founding fathers intended the Constitution to mean the CRAP OBAMA, BUSH CHenney and TRUMP have been selling NT.

I not going into an Orwellian NEWSPEAK of IF this happens then the Constitution Doesn't count or REALLY doesn't mean it anymore crap


..I, Obama... Bush.. Cheney... Trump., do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help me God.

That's what the swore to do.
Not to "support the status quo" or the political "system" or my party or whatever the heck comes into my head or what ever the people want because theyre scared of Muslims or immigrants or not getting oil or losing our "status" or making sure we have the biggest military.

I, ...., do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help me God.

[NightTrain]

I didn't stutter.

Obama knew what the Constitution said and what it meant.
He chose to ignore it when he wanted to or pretend it said something he KNEW it didn't intend.
Examples:
Engaging in Libya without congress.
Making up immigration laws by executive order
Spying on U.S citizens without warrents
Killing U.S citizens without trial
to start a list

Scumbag. Thank God he's gone.

Bush

, well it's hard to know what he really did or didn't know
But he defended his unconstituional acts in various speaches written for him and never did much but repeat the catch phrases and crack jokes (and pass questions off to Chenny Rumsfeild or the the AG) when asked to eleborate by reporters.
Examples:
Spying on U.S citizens without warrents
Torturing terrorist SUSPECTS in custody
Imprisioning people without trial or due process of law
His own set of Executive Orders and Unconstitutional "Signing statements"
To start the list...

Grey areas.

CHeney

-sheesh - he doesn't care about hte constitution or the 3 branches having CO-EQUAL powers, he wanted the president to have the last word.

Pres. GEORGE H.W. BUSH: This will not stand, this aggression against Kuwait.
NARRATOR: As secretary of defense, Cheney argued the president should not seek congressional authorization for the Gulf war.
Rep. MICKEY EDWARDS (R-OK), 1977-'92: The leadership in Congress generally was telling the first President Bush, "You have to get permission from Congress to go into the Gulf war." The president didn't think that was the case. He resisted it.
RICHARD CHENEY, Fmr. Defense Secretary: [FRONTLINE 1996] I argued that we did not need congressional authorization, and that legally and from a constitutional standpoint, we had all the authority we needed.
JACK GOLDSMITH: Secretary of Defense Cheney's advice was that it was unnecessary and imprudent- unnecessary because the Constitution did not require it, imprudent because Congress might say no.
RICHARD CHENEY: [FRONTLINE 1996] If we'd lost the vote in the Congress, I would certainly have recommended to the president that we go forward anyway.

Read this interview with David Gergan to see what i'm talking about

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ws/gergen.html

I paid a lot of attention to what he's said thorugh the years myself. I have no need to make stuff up. Chenney beleives in an imperial presidency NOT a CO-Equal constitutional one like the founders designed.
He KNEW EXCATLY what he was doing.

Seriously, Rev, Cheney was the VP. If anything, Dubya was to blame, this crap borders the Blood for Oil bullshit the moonbats were moaning about.

TRUMP

,
C'mon NT, Trump seems to know NOTHING about the constitution. Every time he comments on it he seems wrong or litereally mentions that HE'S BEEN TOLD that he Can't do XYZ.
Or just Bluffs his way through with hand waving and assurances that what he's going to do WILL be constitutional, despite the fact that what he JUST SAID is UNconstitutional.

I'm just calling it like i see it.
If you can show me quotes of Trump speaking for more than 30 sec COGENTLY about the constitution or the constitutional role of the executive branch I'd like to see it. ANd i'll change my opinion some.

If not I stand by my statement.

Show me where Clinton did. Or Zero did. Or Carter did.

sorry if the concept hits you like it's from left field.
BUt NO one can HONESTLY that the founding fathers intended the Constitution to mean the CRAP OBAMA, BUSH CHenney and TRUMP have been selling NT.

I not going into an Orwellian NEWSPEAK of IF this happens then the Constitution Doesn't count or REALLY doesn't mean it anymore crap


..I, Obama... Bush.. Cheney... Trump., do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help me God.

That's what the swore to do.
Not to "support the status quo" or the political "system" or my party or whatever the heck comes into my head or what ever the people want because theyre scared of Muslims or immigrants or not getting oil or losing our "status" or making sure we have the biggest military.

I, ...., do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help me God.

Let's drop the crap, what is your legitimate beef with Trump?

I hear you clucking, but I can't see the nest.

[revelarts]

Grey areas.

seriously?
read the constitution and put the actions i mentione next to them and make them fit objectiveively.
it's impossible ...objectively.
But with partisan love and rose colored glasses ... ok sure "gray areas".

Seriously, Rev, Cheney was the VP. If anything, Dubya was to blame, this crap borders the Blood for Oil bullshit the moonbats were moaning about.

It's his own words NT.
in the example I gave he wanted to... and ADVISED... presidents to IGNORE Congress and assume unconstitutional authorities.
Again being objective here

Show me where Clinton did. Or Zero did. Or Carter did.

I asked you 1st NT.
show me Trump's cogent constitutional rationals for his statements that, on their face, seem clearly unconstitutional.

But Bill Clinton had no love of the Constitution either. And his bad acts were more purely criminal.
Carter WAS knowledgable and more respectful of it ... in word... but also crossed the line when he felt like it... but to FAR milder degrees than Obama or Bush/Chenny ever did i believe.

Let's drop the crap, what is your legitimate beef with Trump?
I hear you clucking, but I can't see the nest.

um well, the Constitution and bill of rights are not crap to cut to me... I think it's important. I think you believe that as well, right?
I don't get the impression Trump has much knowledge of them or that he places much value on them. Other than roadblocks to his plans that people keep throwing in his face.

NT, just show me i'm wrong... and I'll adjust my opinion.
But don't assume hidden or bad motives on my part while giving him every benny of the doubt, the purest motives... and talking about "grey areas".

[revelarts]

[revelarts]

GOOD COP!

Civil Asset Forfeiture CPAC 2017

[revelarts]

Oklahoma Highway Patrol (and Others police depts) have devices that freezes and/or takes money from prepaid debit cards or bank cards.






BAD Police DEPT POLICY!
so ALL the highway patrol members ...even though they may be MOSTLY GREAT people on the OKHP... they are ORDERED to use a BAD unconstitutional POLICY/TACTIC in their Law enforcement activity.
ALL of them.




Protect and Serve or Highway robbery?

[revelarts]

In 2014 Cops Took More Property From Americans Than Burglars Did.
http://gawker.com/cops-took-more-pro...-di-1744205551

...Last year(2014), all of America’s burglars extracted a total of just $3.9 billion worth of property from their cumulative marks. Pansies, the nation’s cops spit in the general direction of that paltry figure. That’s all you got?
That’s because over the same period, U.S. law enforcement officials netted $4.5 billion in goods from Americans through a process known as civil asset forfeiture, an astounding figure that economist Martin Armstrong noted on his blog last week in response to an Institute for Justice report.
Consider that for a moment: in 2014, cops took more property from Americans than burglars did....

Cops In Texas Seize Millions By 'Policing for Profit'
https://www.forbes.com/sites/institu.../#29ca97bd1a81

....These cases can be so baffling, one Texas Supreme Court Justice recently compared civil forfeiture to Alice in Wonderland and the works of Franz Kafka. But civil forfeiture isn’t just a quirky curiosity—it’s a powerful incentive for law enforcement to take millions...

Is there ROOM for the police to IMPROVE?
Is it wrong to ask for REFORM?

[jimnyc]

Change up the rules across the nation to inject a judge in every case. No forfeiture or confiscation without a judge in (?) so many days. The police have to have the ability to do their jobs. Certain forfeitures are spot on, in my opinion. In the largest of cases, they can even get a judges signature in advance. For drug seizures and large possession cases, they should be able to do so under certain criteria, but it's still up to a judge to finalize in a certain amount of days, and of course all defendants have that right to be there and defend themselves and their property.

Just some judges, that's almost all this program needs, which is an understatement. And while the worst of the worst is highlighted, which is cool with me, it's how you root out the issues - these programs do good as well. In addition to getting the truly bad folks off the streets, their ill gotten gains are also taken away and used for various good. That's another thing they should do? Make it uniform in what the proceeds are used for. I believe it's quite different around the nation. If this tool is fixed, and used appropriately, it's a very good tool and deterrent.