It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jeff Sessions Announces Justice Department Will Increase Asset Forfeiture

page: 1
25
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:02 PM
link   
WELL...

The "party of small government" apparently loves Civil Asset Forfeiture!



U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said the Justice Department will issue new directives to increase the federal govenment's use of civil asset forfeiture, a controversial practice that allows law enforcement to seize property from suspected criminals without charging them with a crime.


That's RIGHT! Even if BEFORE you've been charged with a crime! Gov. taking property BEFORE a trial? BEFORE someone is even charged?

It can lead to corruption...



However, the practice has exploded since then, and civil liberties groups and political advocacy organizations, both liberal and conservative, say the perverse profit incentives and lack of oversight lead to far more average citizens having their property seized than cartel bosses.

Link

How does ATS feel about the GOV being able to STEAL from you before being charged with a crime
How is this NOT at ODDS with everything so-called "Freedom lovin' Americans" stand for??

Thanks Trump administration!
edit on 17-7-2017 by DanteGaland because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:16 PM
link   

How does ATS feel about the GOV being able to STEAL from you before being charged with a crime


kind of a silly question, as thread after thread has made it pretty clear how most (including myself) feel about it.

Since the OP couldn't be bothered to provide links, I will.

WaPo article about Sessions' comments

Holder DoJ statement about "adoptive forfeiture"

Basically it sounds like Sessions is going to rescind the directive that Holder put out about the Fed "adopting" state and local forfeitures.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

Blatant thievery under the guise of "justice".. civil asset forfeiture is already a controversial issue. Expanding on this practice is absolute f*cking BULLSH*T



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:17 PM
link   


"We hope to issue this week a new directive on asset forfeiture—especially for drug traffickers," Sessions said. "With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures. No criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime. Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate as is sharing with our partners."


Just making the traffickers pay taxes is all.




posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: DanteGaland

That's RIGHT! Even if BEFORE you've been charged with a crime! Gov. taking property BEFORE a trial? BEFORE someone is even charged?


The question is, why would people agree to this?

Is this property that "contains evidence" to be used to support the charge? Or, is it just any property just because it has a market value and can be turned into cash?

Are they trying to "lock down" the assets, in case the person is found guilty, to ensure the guilty can "pay" the court the fees and damages that might be assessed.

If the person is found innocent, does the government then release the assets, give them back, and also "pay interest" on the value of the things they seized for the duration held in their possession? So, if the trial takes 4 years, then the government pays 4 years of interest cost on the market value of the assets.

What's the complete picture?

What's the reason for the expanded powers?


edit on 17-7-2017 by AMPTAH because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:29 PM
link   
If the asset forfeiture were in connection with evidence and the charging of a crime, I'd understand. But they don't even need to charge you with a crime and can steal your money without having to prove anything. That's not "justice" by any means.

What about people who don't trust the banks as much after seeing what happened in Cyprus and choose to keep cash at their house? The police can simply steal it all and claim "it may be in connection to a crime", and walk away with your life savings in hand with no repercussions.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: FamCore

It's not just that, it's what happens afterward.

It's up to you (in most cases; not all, but most) to prove that whatever has been seized is NOT connected to criminal activity. It's not up to the seizing agency to prove that it IS connected. The burden of proof is on you to prove the negative.

That's mind boggling.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
The burden of proof is on you to prove the negative.

That's mind boggling.



If that were really true, then that government would be short lived.

There must be something else there, that we're missing.

If people have the "right to bear arms", and the government has the "right to seize assets" without due process.

Then, obviously, it's a no brainier, that at some point these two "rights" will enter the "boxing ring."

First, you need to remove the "right to bear arms", before you can impose such a tyrannical law.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

That's exactly how it works in many areas.

My state requires LE to have a conviction to be able to keep assets. The problem? Under federal law, local agencies can claim it's a federal forfeiture and get around the state law. The feds keep part of it and the rest is returned to the original agency.

As for the rest of what you said...I mean that's all well and good but talk is cheap. You still have the 2nd, and the government can still seize your assets.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

Correct, both Parties love to steal property without due process.

A quote from one of our beloved Founding Fathers comes to mind.



edit on 17-7-2017 by gladtobehere because: typo



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

Funny innit the biggest criminal proceeds are made by the deceptive bast@rds calling themselves Politicians and yet when wIll their bank accounts get pilfered?

There needs to be a new way of thinking on these issues by the general public as the people pushing these policies are so compromised they are totally illegitimate and their authority is worthless.

How the Police can seriously believe they are serving law and order when they are blatantly stealing off normal individuals is beyond me....its gotta end.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 04:53 PM
link   
You all can get all upset if you want and make phone calls to your representatives. When it comes down to the wire, you can't do squat except squabble in horror and rage and hope it gets attention from the media. That is as far as it will go. We all are peasants. No true rights, nor will anyone fight for them.

Welcome to America.
edit on 17-7-2017 by 4N0M4LY because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Ugh! The people were finally making headway state by state to end or severely curtail this practice. Sessions is a prick.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

Do not blame the republicans as a whole. Sessions is a far right extremist in my opinion. If there ever was anything that needed a petition and congressional hearing, it is this. Stealing property is criminal regardless who does it.

Can he just declare it? Is anyone else involved in the decision?



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:27 PM
link   
This will be severely abused again in poorer states like my homestate, crooked IL. $$$



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland


Jeff Sessions is a product of the SWAMP that President Trump promised to drain. Him being picked as Attorney General is baffling to me.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: DanteGaland

Correct, both Parties love to steal property without due process.

A quote from one of our beloved Founding Fathers comes to mind.




Exactly! Obama changed the Medicaid clawback provisions, to shut more seniors out of nursing home care. He really didn't/doesn't like older people breathing air in this world.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Not a big fan of this. This type of action breeds corruption like crazy.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wardaddy454



"We hope to issue this week a new directive on asset forfeiture—especially for drug traffickers," Sessions said. "With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures. No criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime. Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate as is sharing with our partners."


Just making the traffickers pay taxes is all.



Yeah- try buying a car private sale. Eight Grand in your pocket, is now eight Grand in the officers pocket.

Cash rarely makes it back to the lockup, and the paperwork is never filed.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Isn't this taking things back to the way it was before Obamas administration? Reversing everything his administration did must surely be a good thing.
How big an issue was this before Holder stopped/relaxed the practice? Were assets really taken from the innocent, or was it used to stop criminal operations?




top topics



 
25
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join