Civil Forfeiture takes it on the chin
« prev   misc   next »

2
0

Civil Forfeiture takes it on the chin

By Quigley following x   2017 Sep 12, 10:09pm 467 views   10 comments   watch   quote     share  


In a spasm of anti-Trump fever, Congress actually did something good it has refused to do for years! And this time it was because they hate the administration, not because they love the Constitution. Whatever, score another one for Trump!

http://reason.com/blog/2017/09/12/house-approves-amendments-to-block-sessi
1 Tenpoundbass   ignore (6)   2017 Sep 13, 4:59am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

This is why we always need distinct Democrats and Republicans in Washington. They keep each other from doing stupid shit.

You idiots arguing over who's the best super hero Mitt Romney or Hillary Clinton ought to have your head examined.
2 lostand confused   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 13, 5:04am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

Cool, now if they can do the same for war on drugs!
3 Roidy   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 13, 6:27am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Gentle Reader,

Civil Asset Forfeiture was originally a RICO tool that effectively defunds organized crime. It is still used for that, but it is also used as a means of depriving ordinary, Joe Blow Citizens of their money and property.

I submit for your review the outrageous case of Motel Caswel in Tewksbury, Mass.

http://www.lowellsun.com/news/ci_22448634/tewksburys-motel-caswell-wins-forfeiture-case#ixzz4sZ3moF00
When you are reading this idiocy please remember that the USGovt admitted assigning a police officer to search for valuable property that could be seized. Makes one wonder about the "War on Drugs", and the motivation for continuing this.

I'm compelled to warn you that the Hotel Caswel is not one cop with too much time on his or her hands. This is not one cop who should be retrained on every weekend for his or her's entire career. No, this is an entire task force of law enforcement agencies and POST'ed officers who indulged themselves.

Now, we have Jeff Sessions again attempting to seize and arrest his way out of our current mess.

How did that work out for us the first time?

Regards,
Roidy
4 bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 13, 6:39am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Roidy says

How did that work out for us the first time?


About as well as militarizing the police. Hopefully congress will bitch slap sessions on that one too.
5 Ernie   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 13, 7:27am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

bob2356 says
congress will bitch slap sessions on that one too.

should have bitchslapped Bush or Obama AG, but did not. They all are pathetic weasels
6 HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Sep 13, 8:25am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

drBu says
They all are pathetic weasels


Could you please hold the compliments. lol
7 Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 13, 9:45am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Wrong is wrong, unconstitutional is unconstitutional. No matter who or which party is in charge of doing it!
8 mell   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 13, 9:52am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Quigley says
Wrong is wrong, unconstitutional is unconstitutional. No matter who or which party is in charge of doing it!


Agreed that was a good move. And it contradicts Iwog's "clairvoyance" of expanding asset forfeiture under Trump ;)
9 joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 13, 10:04am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

mell says

Agreed that was a good move. And it contradicts Iwog's "clairvoyance" of expanding asset forfeiture under Trump ;)


lol--So Trump trying to expand civil forfeiture but Congress stopping him, proves Iwog wrong?
10 mell   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 13, 10:16am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

joeyjojojunior says

Agreed that was a good move. And it contradicts Iwog's "clairvoyance" of expanding asset forfeiture under Trump ;)


lol--So Trump trying to expand civil forfeiture but Congress stopping him, proves Iwog wrong?


Absolutely, unless DT vetoes it.

Comment as anon_519c7 or log in at top of page: