Trump says they'll "destroy the career" of Texas Senator who opposes Civil Asset Forfeiture.

a reply to: neo96

This is not even close to the same thing.....

This is robbery for lack of.a. Better term....

It has nothing to do w paying taxes, or not making a mortgage payment....

They pull you over, (although could be other methods) they deem you have too much cash and they take it, no trial, no jurty, sometimes not even charges ....

And you never see it again

You need to do your homework

originally posted by: kosmicjack

originally posted by: allprowolfy
Op answer me this scenario: Mexican drug Cartels come into Texas with weapons , money , cars and valuables and get caught. Am i to assume that this asset forfeiture is unlawful? If it is man you seriously need to get out of your cozy chair and head down to the border. Its a dam mess down there?

And plenty of people drive to Vegas with the same things. Why should some corrupt, backwater sheriff get to keep it simply because they stopped them on a traffic violation?

Do not disagree with this particular statement of yours. However your post sounds like America doesnt have different forfeiture laws already in place. Such as child support, taxes, home loans, car loans,etc,

a reply to: pirhanna

And used to expand the police state with equipment/tech and fund drug courts, etc.

a reply to: allprowolfy

None of that is even comparable.

What i am really getting tired of is everyone is so worried about Trump and his wording about asset forfeiture. Hello people wasnt it Bush whom installed the "patriot Act." where having a back pack could get you labeled as a terrorist and then a free trip to Gitmo without hapeus corpus. Our civial liberties have been torn apart yearrs ago so were in the hell were you when me and my fellow patriots were screaming at the top of our lungs to stop it. The damage has been done, now its time to control our borders 50 million on food stamps and goverment assistance should be your first clue that " Houston We Have A Problem."

a reply to: gladtobehere

That was a joke, hence the laugh.

What was not a joke was Obama IRS administration targeting individuals he didn't agree with and destroying their lives.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: allprowolfy

None of that is even comparable.

Agree....

What makes me almost ill, is every other Trump thread on here explodes....

Yet this one w huge implications to citizens, w him BLATANTLY stating he's going to destroy another politician because said politician isn't in favor of continuing unconstitutional laws as they stand, is garnering NO feed back from his supporters

They can't even call fake news on this one ...

This reconfirmed my ongoing suspicions about Trumps apathy towards the constitution , and his propensity to bully anything me that doesn't tow his, or his cronies line...

When was the last time we had a president openly threaten to destroy the reputation and career of someone else in gov because of their political views?

a reply to: allprowolfy

Just like the last 8 yrs , this thread isn't about Bush, this is about Trump and his ongoing direction...

This is about a president who threatened another politicians career , because he doesn't want to do what Reumo and his CRonies want ....

This isn't tit for tat, this isn't high school......

Hold these people accountable and stop making excuses

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: gladtobehere

That was a joke, hence the laugh.

What was not a joke was Obama IRS administration targeting individuals he didn't agree with and destroying their lives.

Deflection,and it was clearly not a joke, and not something to joke about even if that WAS the case

Again stop making excuses, if you're a true conservative this should bother you....

This is the look of a total authoritarian regime in front of us, scary times indeed. Than again, I am not surprised, after seeing the pattern for last few months- he can declare anyone a traitor etc with a simple tweet, there goes your entire constitutional rights..

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Deflection,and it was clearly not a joke, and not something to joke about even if that WAS the case

1. That was a joke. While you may not get it obviously others did and they even laughed including the POTUS. Not everyone has the same sense of humor.

stop making excuses,

2. I didn't vote for him and I'm not making any excuses for him and still very much not trust him. I have called him out for his Stupid Sh1t that I don't agree with such as the Wall and His selection for the FCC. Check out some of my post history if you like.

if you're a true conservative this should bother you....

3. I'm not, I'm actually a horrible one, or as trump would say , very bad very bad . I have no party loyalty or ideology blinders.

Come to think of it I'm a horrible liberal,libertarian,and conservative as I don't tend to blind myself and look at things from only one political ideology but rather what makes sense for the issue , the timing, and reality.

I lean as a libertarian because of rampant corruption in DC I feel that we need smaller gov't not bigger gov't, but I'm not very good as a libertarian either as I felt
Bernie was our best candidate

Sadly I was wrong about Bernie and he was a sell out from the beginning as exposed by his endorsement of Hillary and the wikileaks. But in my own defence with a choice between WackyDoo and LyingDoo what did I have to lose.

a reply to: neo96

Your a hypocrite.

You bitched to no end at even the slightest move to infringe on your constitutional right to bare arms.

But the right to have a fair trial and due process before loss of liberty or property you are ok to see stripped?

BOTH rights should be important.

You are no diffrent to a hard left democrat! Only diffrence is the rights you want to see trodden on and the parts of the constitution you want ignored.

this is the strangest law i have ever heard of, why is it still active?
why did Obama appoint Loretta lynch as attorney general when she her self confiscated more than a $100 Mill worth of peoples stuff ?

a reply to: crazyewok

Your a hypocrite.

No more than anyone else around here.

Thanks.

a reply to: neo96
Its nice to see peoples true colours showing.

Lot of facists coming out on ATS left and right......

a reply to: crazyewok

Well this so called 'fascist'.

Isnt stupid enough to travel with thousands of dollars on their person or in their vehicle.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: crazyewok

Well this so called 'fascist'.

Isnt stupid enough to travel with thousands of dollars on their person or in their vehicle.

That shouldn't be an issue.....we SHOULD be able to do that w out fear of it being taken and never returned due to a unconstitutional law

How can you not see this? Or are you just being intentional obtuse as to not implicate your candidate?

What happened to "Trust me if he goes against the constitution those of us that voted for him will be the first to call him out and hold his feet to the fire"

Disgraceful man

a reply to: neo96

But you should have that right

From your constitution.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

If we can scrap those parts of the constitution maybe its fair then for the goverment to take your beloved collection of boom boom sticks? Seeing as we are going to ignore the constitution now we can can ignore the 2nd too right?

lol he was obv joking... nice spin tho.... but how about the full video?



what should be focused on is what was said after....

"We've sat at this table with the former administration, this is totally different.

Not once did the POTUS go around the room & ask the sherriffs what issues were important to them in their parts of the country.

We've been here before, but we've never had a president sit down & listen to what it is that we're facing, & that's why we appreciate it."

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: gladtobehere

That was a joke, hence the laugh.

What was not a joke was Obama IRS administration targeting individuals he didn't agree with and destroying their lives.

the IRS "targeted" organizations that were "claiming" a tax exemption.....ALL organizations that claimed it, were "targeted"...why?...to check if they had a legal exemption under the law, how in the hell would the
IRS know if they DIDN'T check????.....why is this so hard for republicans to understand?....