Trump's JEFF SESSIONS WANTS TO MAKE “LEGALIZED THEFT” GREAT AGAIN

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • PAULYPOKER
    BARRELED IN @ SBR!
    • 12-06-08
    • 36581

    #1
    Trump's JEFF SESSIONS WANTS TO MAKE “LEGALIZED THEFT” GREAT AGAIN
    DONALD TRUMP’S JUSTICE Department revived a federal program on Wednesday that gives state and local law enforcement more power to seize property from people who haven’t been charged, let alone convicted, of a crime.


    The practice — known as “civil asset forfeiture” — became widespread as part of the drug crackdown in the 1980s, after Congress passed a law in 1984 that allowed the Department of Justice to keep the property it seized. At the time, forfeiture was billed as a way to undermine the resources of large criminal enterprises, but law enforcement saw it as a way to underwrite their budgets, and have overwhelmingly gone after people without the means to challenge the seizures in court.


    The practice has become so widespread that in 2014, law enforcement officers took more property from American citizens than all home and office burglaries combined.


    Civil liberties organizations have called asset forfeiture “legalized theft,” and as the practice has become more widespread, it has become deeply unpopular. According to a poll last year by the Cato Institute, 84 percent of Americans oppose property seizures from people not convicted of a crime. Most states have passed laws restricting the practice, or banning it outright.


    But Donald Trump has shown strong, personal support for civil forfeiture. At a meeting of sheriffs at the White House in February, after being told that a Texas state legislator was trying to reform the practice at a meeting of sheriffs in February, Trump said “We’ll destroy his career.”


    It appeared that Trump was learning about the practice for the first time.

    Here is Trump in a meeting with Sheriffs from around the country...

    In the meeting a sheriff told Trump that the Texas senator wanted to
    introduce Legislation that requires conviction before forfeiture..

    And Trump's response was: You wanna give me his name?
    We'll destroy his career.
    Jokingly but seriously



    On Wednesday, the Justice Department reopened a specific loophole that allows state and local police to sidestep state laws through a practice known as adoptive forfeitures. The loophole allows state and local law enforcement to continue to pillage the property of citizens even in the face of local bans on the practice, as long as they refer the case to federal agencies after they seize property. They get to keep up to 80 percent of what they take, and can use it for their own budgets. The feds take a 20 percent cut of the loot.


    That loophole had been a 30-year policy of the Department of Justice, until the Department under Obama banned it in 2015. In response to its reinstatement, the ACLU released a statement calling the move “part of Sessions’ agenda to bring back the failed and racist War on Drugs.” The move was even opposed by members of Trump’s own party. Republican Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said the practice violates the Fifth Amendment, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, released a statement saying “the DOJ seems determined to lose in court before it changes its policies for the better.”

    Read more here>JEFF SESSIONS WANTS TO MAKE “LEGALIZED THEFT” GREAT AGAIN

  • DwightShrute
    SBR Aristocracy
    • 01-17-09
    • 103400

    #2
    Pros

    Law enforcement has to deal with proving a criminal did something wrong, which can require extremely specific evidence. In the case of organized crime outfits, this was not always possible. Civil forfeiture laws were designed to deal with the legal loopholes crime fighting is frequently at odds with. For example, a drug courier carrying drugs into a country on a private plane. Pre-civil forfeiture laws, it was not possible to confiscate the plane or any cash the courier might be holding because the courier didn’t own it.
    Civil forfeiture gives law enforcement the ability to take money away from fraudsters, and could provide funding for law enforcement.

    Cons

    Those same benefits can be seen as potential cons as well. Funding for law enforcement means that cops have an incentive to seize property. Seizing funds or assets without charging an individual can also be viewed as extrajudicial, especially because there is no legal authorization for it.

    http://www.illegalimmigrationfacts.c...il-forfeiture/
    Comment
    • pilebuck13
      SBR Posting Legend
      • 05-15-15
      • 17918

      #3
      Dude go to the political form with this dumb shit I thought we agreed months ago on this. Sbr move this shit.
      Comment
      • chico2663
        BARRELED IN @ SBR!
        • 09-02-10
        • 36915

        #4
        Originally posted by PAULYPOKER
        DONALD TRUMP’S JUSTICE Department revived a federal program on Wednesday that gives state and local law enforcement more power to seize property from people who haven’t been charged, let alone convicted, of a crime.


        The practice — known as “civil asset forfeiture” — became widespread as part of the drug crackdown in the 1980s, after Congress passed a law in 1984 that allowed the Department of Justice to keep the property it seized. At the time, forfeiture was billed as a way to undermine the resources of large criminal enterprises, but law enforcement saw it as a way to underwrite their budgets, and have overwhelmingly gone after people without the means to challenge the seizures in court.


        The practice has become so widespread that in 2014, law enforcement officers took more property from American citizens than all home and office burglaries combined.


        Civil liberties organizations have called asset forfeiture “legalized theft,” and as the practice has become more widespread, it has become deeply unpopular. According to a poll last year by the Cato Institute, 84 percent of Americans oppose property seizures from people not convicted of a crime. Most states have passed laws restricting the practice, or banning it outright.


        But Donald Trump has shown strong, personal support for civil forfeiture. At a meeting of sheriffs at the White House in February, after being told that a Texas state legislator was trying to reform the practice at a meeting of sheriffs in February, Trump said “We’ll destroy his career.”


        It appeared that Trump was learning about the practice for the first time.

        Here is Trump in a meeting with Sheriffs from around the country...

        In the meeting a sheriff told Trump that the Texas senator wanted to
        introduce Legislation that requires conviction before forfeiture..

        And Trump's response was: You wanna give me his name?
        We'll destroy his career.
        Jokingly but seriously



        On Wednesday, the Justice Department reopened a specific loophole that allows state and local police to sidestep state laws through a practice known as adoptive forfeitures. The loophole allows state and local law enforcement to continue to pillage the property of citizens even in the face of local bans on the practice, as long as they refer the case to federal agencies after they seize property. They get to keep up to 80 percent of what they take, and can use it for their own budgets. The feds take a 20 percent cut of the loot.


        That loophole had been a 30-year policy of the Department of Justice, until the Department under Obama banned it in 2015. In response to its reinstatement, the ACLU released a statement calling the move “part of Sessions’ agenda to bring back the failed and racist War on Drugs.” The move was even opposed by members of Trump’s own party. Republican Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said the practice violates the Fifth Amendment, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, released a statement saying “the DOJ seems determined to lose in court before it changes its policies for the better.”

        Read more here>JEFF SESSIONS WANTS TO MAKE “LEGALIZED THEFT” GREAT AGAIN

        there was a guy whose father loaned him money out of his pension to start a restaurant and they stole it. Know of a guy that won 40,000 in vegas and the cops stole it. If you ever seen sheriff jones on fox news. I know that asshole slum lord. He makes a living on stealing shit from the asset forfiture
        Comment
        • boneheaded1
          SBR Wise Guy
          • 12-09-10
          • 815

          #5
          Originally posted by pilebuck13
          Dude go to the political form with this dumb shit I thought we agreed months ago on this. Sbr move this shit.
          Dumb shit? This is actually good information to know. If you drive to a cardroom or a casino, this is a good heads up for the future. Oh, you get a receipt for the confiscated cash but it's as good as toilet paper.

          Screw whatever politics, this is a good heads up to all gamblers.

          You are just pissed cuz this directive came from your boy.
          Comment
          • eidolon
            SBR Hall of Famer
            • 01-02-08
            • 9531

            #6
            It's the same guy while being the Attorney General of Alabama, thought there is no problem putting someone in jail for 10 years for smoking a joint.
            Comment
            • guitarjosh
              SBR Hall of Famer
              • 12-25-07
              • 5797

              #7
              He should just call it civil asset taxes and the left would love it.
              Comment
              • BOA12
                SBR Posting Legend
                • 02-19-12
                • 20622

                #8
                Originally posted by guitarjosh
                He should just call it civil asset taxes and the left would love it.
                Call it what it is . Abuse of discretionary power.
                Comment
                • floridagolfer
                  SBR MVP
                  • 12-19-08
                  • 2757

                  #9
                  Originally posted by DwightShrute
                  Pros

                  Law enforcement has to deal with proving a criminal did something wrong, which can require extremely specific evidence. In the case of organized crime outfits, this was not always possible. Civil forfeiture laws were designed to deal with the legal loopholes crime fighting is frequently at odds with. For example, a drug courier carrying drugs into a country on a private plane. Pre-civil forfeiture laws, it was not possible to confiscate the plane or any cash the courier might be holding because the courier didn’t own it.
                  Civil forfeiture gives law enforcement the ability to take money away from fraudsters, and could provide funding for law enforcement.

                  Cons

                  Those same benefits can be seen as potential cons as well. Funding for law enforcement means that cops have an incentive to seize property. Seizing funds or assets without charging an individual can also be viewed as extrajudicial, especially because there is no legal authorization for it.

                  http://www.illegalimmigrationfacts.c...il-forfeiture/
                  This is the first thing they teach you in law school: Everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

                  Once you prove guilt, fine, go to it. Until then, hands off.
                  Comment
                  • rkelly110
                    BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                    • 10-05-09
                    • 39691

                    #10
                    Doesn't matter, Sessions on his way out. Nothing like having the guy who recommended you publically throwing
                    you under the bus.

                    Funny how the right hated Obama, but did away with that law, now it's coming back. Good job America.
                    Comment
                    • SportsMushroom
                      SBR MVP
                      • 09-28-10
                      • 4177

                      #11
                      Comment
                      • guitarjosh
                        SBR Hall of Famer
                        • 12-25-07
                        • 5797

                        #12
                        Originally posted by BOA12
                        Call it what it is . Abuse of discretionary power.
                        Just like taxes
                        Comment
                        • PAULYPOKER
                          BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                          • 12-06-08
                          • 36581

                          #13
                          Originally posted by guitarjosh
                          He should just call it civil asset taxes and the left would love it.
                          I'm not "left"
                          however your post is equivalent to saying: if Trump would quit grabbing pussy the left would love it..........

                          I'll bet if Trump gunned down a pregnant christian woman in the street, loyal trump supporters would say
                          "she must of deserved it and possibly cheer him on for a great kill"........
                          Comment
                          • guitarjosh
                            SBR Hall of Famer
                            • 12-25-07
                            • 5797

                            #14
                            Originally posted by PAULYPOKER
                            I'm not "left"
                            however your post is equivalent to saying: if Trump would quit grabbing pussy the left would love it..........

                            I'll bet if Trump gunned down a pregnant christian woman in the street, loyal trump supporters would say
                            "she must of deserved it and possibly cheer him on for a great kill"........
                            It's pointing out that the left is the champion of taking money and property from good people, but is up in arms over taking those things from criminals.
                            Comment
                            • PAULYPOKER
                              BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                              • 12-06-08
                              • 36581

                              #15
                              Originally posted by guitarjosh

                              It's pointing out that the left is the champion of taking money and property from good people, but is up in arms over taking those things from criminals.
                              How can you legally take money and possessions from an innocent US citizen
                              who has not been proven guilty of any crime?
                              Comment
                              • guitarjosh
                                SBR Hall of Famer
                                • 12-25-07
                                • 5797

                                #16
                                Originally posted by PAULYPOKER
                                How can you legally take money and possessions from an innocent US citizen
                                who has not been proven guilty of any crime?
                                Call it a tax and saying you're making that person pay their fair share.
                                Comment
                                • Thor4140
                                  SBR Posting Legend
                                  • 02-09-08
                                  • 22296

                                  #17
                                  U think this is bad. U should see what that cok sucker who now runs the EPA is letting these chemical companies do now. Welcome back to all the cancer causing bullshit that was not allowed under the democrats. Republicans call it bad regulations but never say which ones they sneak by, just for profits for some scumbag to let in the air.
                                  Comment
                                  • chico2663
                                    BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                                    • 09-02-10
                                    • 36915

                                    #18
                                    Josh, I hope you go to vegas and win 50,000. Than as your leaving town forget to turn on your blinker. Have the police confiscate your winnings and than your dumb ass would know what sessions and the police are doing.
                                    Comment
                                    • PAULYPOKER
                                      BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                                      • 12-06-08
                                      • 36581

                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by guitarjosh
                                      Call it a tax and saying you're making that person pay their fair share.
                                      So you are ok with it, if a police would do a routine traffic stop on you..
                                      Then just cause he feels like it,he decides to take your vehicle...

                                      And you would say:
                                      "Thank you officer,I love paying taxes..
                                      Anyway I can help our great local law enforcement"...

                                      "Next week, I'll be driving my Hummer, I'll gladly give it up as well"..

                                      lol...........
                                      Comment
                                      • guitarjosh
                                        SBR Hall of Famer
                                        • 12-25-07
                                        • 5797

                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by chico2663
                                        Josh, I hope you go to vegas and win 50,000. Than as your leaving town forget to turn on your blinker. Have the police confiscate your winnings and than your dumb ass would know what sessions and the police are doing.

                                        Would it make you feel better if instead of taking all $50,000 they only took $12,500? The government takes 25% of winnings over $5,000, which would be $12,500, which you defend, because you're a hypocrite who is too stupid to even realize you're opinions are 100% contradictory.


                                        Originally posted by PAULYPOKER
                                        So you are ok with it, if a police would do a routine traffic stop on you..
                                        Then just cause he feels like it,he decides to take your vehicle...

                                        And you would say:
                                        "Thank you officer,I love paying taxes..
                                        Anyway I can help our great local law enforcement"...

                                        "Next week, I'll be driving my Hummer, I'll gladly give it up as well"..

                                        lol...........
                                        I'm not okay with it all, just pointing out more left wing hypocritical double think. The only reason left wingers are against this is because they think it can happen to them. If they believed it never would, they would be in favor of it.
                                        Comment
                                        • chico2663
                                          BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                                          • 09-02-10
                                          • 36915

                                          #21
                                          Josh part of living in the greatest country is paying for that. Thanks for letting us know your a broke deek. If you made any money than you would be paying 35%. Those roads ,buildings and bridges weren't shit out. Taxes is what paid for it. P.s I was paying 53% when you consider self employment,state and feds so No, I don't have a problem paying my fair share..
                                          Comment
                                          • The Kraken
                                            BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                                            • 12-25-11
                                            • 28918

                                            #22
                                            Originally posted by guitarjosh
                                            Would it make you feel better if instead of taking all $50,000 they only took $12,500? The government takes 25% of winnings over $5,000, which would be $12,500, which you defend, because you're a hypocrite who is too stupid to even realize you're opinions are 100% contradictory.




                                            I'm not okay with it all, just pointing out more left wing hypocritical double think. The only reason left wingers are against this is because they think it can happen to them. If they believed it never would, they would be in favor of it.
                                            Would you be in favor of something if you thought it couldn't happen to you?
                                            Comment
                                            • guitarjosh
                                              SBR Hall of Famer
                                              • 12-25-07
                                              • 5797

                                              #23
                                              Originally posted by chico2663
                                              Josh part of living in the greatest country is paying for that. Thanks for letting us know your a broke deek. If you made any money than you would be paying 35%. Those roads ,buildings and bridges weren't shit out. Taxes is what paid for it. P.s I was paying 53% when you consider self employment,state and feds so No, I don't have a problem paying my fair share..
                                              We made it the greatest country on earth without obscenely high taxes and government only spending 3% of the national income. Most buildings are build without taxes. Those roads and bridges can be built without taxes. If you think your share is 53%, fine. I think 53% is obsene.

                                              Originally posted by The Kraken
                                              Would you be in favor of something if you thought it couldn't happen to you?
                                              It depends on what it is. If it's something good, like winning the lottery, I'm fine with it. If it's throwing someone in prison for some reason that doesn't apply to me, no.
                                              Comment
                                              • sweethook
                                                SBR Posting Legend
                                                • 11-21-07
                                                • 12667

                                                #24
                                                hell a guy in alabama was growing pot for meds for smoke and they took his grow light , thats just pure meaness huh . whats up with that shit ... jezz
                                                Comment
                                                • RangeFinder
                                                  SBR Hall of Famer
                                                  • 10-27-16
                                                  • 8041

                                                  #25
                                                  Another fake news thread. It's getting old.
                                                  Comment
                                                  • 19th Hole
                                                    SBR Posting Legend
                                                    • 03-22-09
                                                    • 18954

                                                    #26
                                                    Originally posted by floridagolfer
                                                    This is the first thing they teach you in law school: Everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
                                                    Once you prove guilt, fine, go to it. Until then, hands off.
                                                    T-H-I-S!!
                                                    Comment
                                                    • Ralphie Halves
                                                      SBR MVP
                                                      • 12-13-09
                                                      • 4507

                                                      #27
                                                      Originally posted by guitarjosh
                                                      Call it a tax and saying you're making that person pay their fair share.
                                                      You beat me to it. I was going to say "socialism", which would have fit perfectly too.
                                                      Comment
                                                      • ByeShea
                                                        SBR Hall of Famer
                                                        • 06-30-08
                                                        • 8112

                                                        #28
                                                        Originally posted by PAULYPOKER
                                                        How can you legally take money and possessions from an innocent US citizen
                                                        who has not been proven guilty of any crime?
                                                        Tough shit. Quit whining and start winning you pansy.
                                                        Comment
                                                        • chico2663
                                                          BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                                                          • 09-02-10
                                                          • 36915

                                                          #29
                                                          Originally posted by ByeShea
                                                          Tough shit. Quit whining and start winning you pansy.
                                                          shea what is your thought on sessions making it to the end of the year?
                                                          Comment
                                                          • rkelly110
                                                            BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                                                            • 10-05-09
                                                            • 39691

                                                            #30
                                                            What's yours is yours until the govt wants it. Don't pay your property taxes for a few years to find out.
                                                            Be in the way of a pipeline or highway the govt wants to put through and resist. Be an old person who
                                                            needs to go to a home and find out who owns your property. Drugs or having money if they find out?
                                                            See ya property! Yeah, quit whining.
                                                            Comment
                                                            • BOA12
                                                              SBR Posting Legend
                                                              • 02-19-12
                                                              • 20622

                                                              #31
                                                              Originally posted by Ralphie Halves
                                                              You beat me to it. I was going to say "socialism", which would have fit perfectly too.
                                                              police state sounds more accurate to all law and order zero tolerant junkies here
                                                              Comment
                                                              Search
                                                              Collapse
                                                              SBR Contests
                                                              Collapse
                                                              Top-Rated US Sportsbooks
                                                              Collapse
                                                              Working...