Wednesday, July 19, 2017

Stockholm Syndrome?


Mary Chastain: "AG Sessions wants the DOJ to increase civil asset forfeitures. He's turning into Trump's worst appointment. First, he wants to continue the war on drugs as states dial it back. Then states finally pull back civil asset forfeitures and Sessions wants to turn it up to 11. Civil asset forfeiture is the ONE issue that is truly bipartisan as Connecticut and even the House has shown. "

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Too many of Legal Insurrection's writers are #NeverTrumpers.
I'm as sick of that site as of
RedState, Resurgent, SooperMexican, Moonbattery
and other Dem-Lite sites.

Anonymous said...

Civil asset forfeitures are wrong, wrong, wrong. What is the matter with that priggish man?

And as far as ganga goes the country is pretty OK with it. There are bigger fish to fry.

Bobby Ahr

Rodger the Real King of France said...

Where are the coney, Hillary, Lerner, lodestar indictments? For starters.

Chris in NC said...

Yeah, I have to agree with the lady here. Civil forfeiture is complete bullshit. You have to prove you're not a criminal to get the stuff back. That's as polar opposite as you can get to the way it should be. The founders would have shot any person who would suggest such a thing.

As far as the hillary, lerner and other indictments, yep. Where the hell are they? Lerner especially.

Drew458 said...

Damn, I agree with all y'all. Civil Forfeiture is the worst most corrupt BS that ever was. One of the New England states passed a law about it last week, that looks like they did away with it unless conviction, but there's a loophole in it as big as a barn. So it's BS. And I don't give a hoot if SCOTUS said it was OK. They've been wrong many many times before, from Dred Scott to Kelo, and they're wrong on that one too; any decision that they make that does not increase the freedom of the individual citizen is most likely flawed.

Yes, so many "Right" blogs are falling to the Left, and not just because #neverTrump. Sux. Try reading The Week. Ack!!

The Choom Gang should be indicted,all of them including Holder, Lerner, Lynch, Emmanuel, Obozo and all the Clintons. Corrupt criminal lying fascists.

And REPEAL NOT REPLACE. WTF did we elect these clowns for anyway?

Not only do we need term limits and a balanced budget amendment, we need a way to yank shit judges off the bench ASAP and a way to vote No Confidence for elected leaders from the county level up.

I'm sick of the BS from DC.

Anonymous said...

Agreed: Civil Forfeiture [aka Theft by State] is utterly unConstitutional.
and Proggie.

Sessions::FAIL

e~C

toadold said...

If you want to build that wall you are going to need "take" land from some of the residents on the border.

Eskyman said...

I agree with all the above.

Sessions has been a tremendous disappointment, and he doesn't seem to be getting any better.

Fire him, President Trump! Replace him with someone who has actually read, understood, and supports the Consitution!

Anonymous said...

Toadold: Ever hear of an 'easement'? Seems to me that most ranchers/farmers would be perfectly happy to have a fence across their property if it kept river crossers from pillaging their homes & farms. Does not matter which side of the fence their crops/cattle/barn, etc are located, if you give it a seconds thought. Gates would be handy, I guess.
If the FedGov was going to eminent domain my property such that what they left to me was unusable and unsaleable, I would vote with my feet, get a large gate installed as part of the ED, and go on with my living. I don't care a whit which side of a fence I happen to spend most of my time. What difference does it make?
That said, asset forfeiture is a complete disgrace, and an affront on the Constitution. "Persons should be safe in their records, property, etc" paraphrased. If you cannot transport YOUR property from one place to another without it being confiscated on the basis of a whim, then we no longer live in a land of laws, the law means nothing.
tomw

Chris in NC said...

toadold, if you can't see the difference from taking for suspicion of a crime and then even if found not guilty you have to fight to get it back (forfeiture) and eminent domain, where the takee is compensated for his/her/it/cis/royal majesty/etc's troubles per the Constitution, then God help you

Anonymous said...



After the reports tonight of President Trump's interview with the NYslimes, I don't think Jeff Sessions will be around much longer. The last time he "offered" the President his resignation, this time will be a "flat out" resign and head back to Alabama.

Big mistake on Trump's part.

Geo

Stu Tarlowe said...

I just wish Trump had "conducted" his "interview" with the NY Slimes the way Michael Corleone "conducted" his "interview" with rival gangster Sollozo and corrupt police captain McCluskey.

Cheesy said...

Wants to expand forfeiture when it's universally regarded as unconstitutional; wants to expand the war on drugs when it's universally regarded as a failed policy.
Do we really need a third strike for this authoritarian asshole to be gone?

Dan said...

I don't like civil asset forfeiture. I do consider it sliding down the scale from questionable to illegal.

As far as drug stuff, I fall back to my same comment as for sanctuary cities -- if you don't like the law, get it changed.

If you don't want illegals to be deported, change the deportation laws.

If you don't like the drug laws, get them changed or repealed. (I'm more in favor of repeal at the Federal level, but strong enforcement at the State level.)

But, overall, I'm not illegal and I don't use illegal drugs, so what do I care?

Post a Comment

Just type your name and post as anonymous if you don't have a Blogger profile.