Trump is Wrong

[Ben]

In the interest of "fair and balanced", here's one where Trump is wrong IMO. During the "Sheriff's meeting" he joked about ruining the career of the TX state Senator who is fighting asset forfeiture laws in the state. I will concede that Trump was joking about the "ruin the career" thing, and will give him the benefit of doubt that he may not have understood what the Sheriff was referring to.

He needs to educate himself on the topic though. I would be sorely disappointed to see him as a proponent of "forfeiture before conviction".

http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/02/08/republican-tx-state-senator-konni-burton-fires-back-at-trump-sheriff-over-civil-asset-forfeiture/

[MechAg94]

Bad joke. 

Given it was likely a joke, I assume he is familiar with the issue.  Don't know if I have ever heard him comment on that issue. 

[Ben]

Bad joke. 

Given it was likely a joke, I assume he is familiar with the issue.  Don't know if I have ever heard him comment on that issue. 

Well, I was just figuring the "destroy them" line was a joke, but he was shaking his head in the incredulous, "Why would someone do that?"  fashion when the sheriff talked about the Senator wanting to restrict forfeiture. Hence my concern that he doesn't actually understand the issue. Or at least it's my hope that misunderstanding is the case. If he understands it and has no problem with it, then I have a problem with him.

[HankB]

I hope he was just trying to be nice to the sheriff . . . because there's something very wrong with seizing private property without so much as criminal charges being filed, much less a conviction.

[zxcvbob]

Someone should have respectfully reminded Trump that they hoped that was an attempt at a joke, because threatening a member of the legislature like that is serious, and we [Texans] have a long memory.  (implying he could be indicted and cuffed as soon as he leaves office)

[cordex]

I hope he was just trying to be nice to the sheriff . . . because there's something very wrong with seizing private property without so much as criminal charges being filed, much less a conviction.

I fully agree with this sentiment, but note that it would be sort of hard for Trump to play the "just being nice" card considering that a big part of his shtick is being the brash, loudmouthed, calls-it-like-I-sees-it jerk.

In my opinion, being nice would be to say: "I certainly understand how important you find the funds that you are able to raise through this channel.  That said, no matter how useful it may be I find it morally questionable - big league.  My next Executive Order will direct the Department of Justice and the DEA to immediately cease pursing civil asset forfeitures outside of criminal trials.  No one write executive orders as well as me.  They will further be directed to permanently terminate 'profit sharing' programs which allow local law enforcement agencies to skirt state laws intended to limit the use of seized funds."

[zxcvbob]

I fully agree with this sentiment, but note that it would be sort of hard for Trump to play the "just being nice" card considering that a big part of his shtick is being the brash, loudmouthed, calls-it-like-I-sees-it jerk.

In my opinion, being nice would be to say: "I certainly understand how important you find the funds that you are able to raise through this channel.  That said, no matter how useful it may be I find it morally questionable - big league.  My next Executive Order will direct the Department of Justice and the DEA to immediately cease pursing civil asset forfeitures outside of criminal trials.  No one write executive orders as well as me.  They will further be directed to permanently terminate 'profit sharing' programs which allow local law enforcement agencies to skirt state laws intended to limit the use of seized funds."

IMHO, he doesn't understand the issue yet (at all) and was trying to make a joke to deflect the issue while showing support for LE.

[KD5NRH]

IMHO, he doesn't understand the issue yet (at all) and was trying to make a joke to deflect the issue while showing support for LE.

That's what I'm hoping.  After all, how much cash do you think he'd think nothing of walking around with, compared to how little has been seized in AF cases?  I'm sure he doesn't normally keep a couple grand in his wallet, but I doubt he'd think twice about taking $x thousand in cash to get something (or sending someone with cash to get it) if there was a true cash only discount or any other benefit to paying in genuine greenbacks.  Understanding that the presence of the cash alone is cause to seize it without recourse would likely get his attention and be considered repulsive to him.

[MikeB]

I fully agree with this sentiment, but note that it would be sort of hard for Trump to play the "just being nice" card considering that a big part of his shtick is being the brash, loudmouthed, calls-it-like-I-sees-it jerk.

In my opinion, being nice would be to say: "I certainly understand how important you find the funds that you are able to raise through this channel.  That said, no matter how useful it may be I find it morally questionable - big league.  My next Executive Order will direct the Department of Justice and the DEA to immediately cease pursing civil asset forfeitures outside of criminal trials.  No one write executive orders as well as me.  They will further be directed to permanently terminate 'profit sharing' programs which allow local law enforcement agencies to skirt state laws intended to limit the use of seized funds."

I heard the tail end of an interview on one of my local talk radio stations with a local sheriff that was in that meeting. The sheriff said it was a joke, and everyone in the room knew it. She (the sheriff) also said he (Trump) was as nice as could be and that he made a point of inviting them all into the Oval Office joking that it was dumb they were 10 feet away and no one had invited them in. They then proceeded to joke around, chat, and took pictures and whatnot. I did not hear the entire interview; I know the radio host is not a fan of civil forfeiture. I got the impression this is yet again the media trying to stick anything negative they can to Trump by taking things out of context.

As for Trump and civil forfeiture. Unfortunately I think along with the Drug War and 4th Amendment rights which all have gone hand in hand over the last 5 decades or so, that Trump might be on the wrong side of this. In other words supportive of the Drug War, possibly civil forfeiture, etc. I hope I'm wrong or that someone can help him understand why he is on the wrong side. I think he sees it as part of his law and order stance; which while understandable is going down the road of good intentions that lead to bad actions and unintended consequences.

[DittoHead]

He's a big fan of eminent domain, wouldn't be surprised if civil forfeiture was fine by him too.

[Pb]

Yes, most conservatives have no respect for the 4th amendment, unfortunately.

[KD5NRH]

He's a big fan of eminent domain, wouldn't be surprised if civil forfeiture was fine by him too.

Eminent domain requires compensation and a much more in-depth process than asset forfeiture, (and AFAIK, there generally has to be an attempt to simply buy the property at a fair price before invoking eminent domain) and there's a lot more opportunity for the victim to argue the fair market value of the property in question.  It's not a case of .gov simply taking your stuff willy-nilly without any compensation, as asset forfeiture is.

[MechAg94]

I think getting upset or even concerned every time Trump says something you don't like is going to get old.  We should expect him to put his foot in his mouth occasionally.  It is just the nature of who he is.  It got him the support he needed to be President, but it also hurts at times. 

[DittoHead]

It's not a case of .gov simply taking your stuff willy-nilly without any compensation, as asset forfeiture is.

Yes, they are different and civil forfeiture is flat out wrong while eminent domain is simply misused and abused by the government at the request of the rich & powerful like Trump. But they are both in the same vein of an overreaching government doing what it thinks it needs to in order to get something done for "the public good".

[White Horseradish]

As for Trump and civil forfeiture. Unfortunately I think along with the Drug War and 4th Amendment rights which all have gone hand in hand over the last 5 decades or so, that Trump might be on the wrong side of this. In other words supportive of the Drug War, possibly civil forfeiture, etc. I hope I'm wrong or that someone can help him understand why he is on the wrong side. I think he sees it as part of his law and order stance; which while understandable is going down the road of good intentions that lead to bad actions and unintended consequences.

His AG pick is an ardent drug warrior.

This is not going to change for the better under Trump.

[markdido]

Obama said, "If they bring a knife, we bring a gun"

And he wasn't joking.

[BlueStarLizzard]

I think getting upset or even concerned every time Trump says something you don't like is going to get old.  We should expect him to put his foot in his mouth occasionally.  It is just the nature of who he is.  It got him the support he needed to be President, but it also hurts at times. 

Don't fall into the trap of thinking he's always on the right side of any given issue just because the left hates him so much.

He is from a big business background and this is the kind of thing I did expect would be among his real faults as a politician.
I highly doubt he's been all that concerned with how property has been acquired when he wanted to build in the past, and I don't think that kind of lack of consciousness on the subject has changed.

Trump is a little tin god. I think he can be useful and a good president, but not one without faults.

[Perd Hapley]

We're going to be saying "Trump is wrong" from time to time over the next 4 to 8 years. Shrug. At least he's better than the last guy, or the other candidate.

I was thinking the other day that Trump is the price we paid to avoid the horror and embarrassment of another Clinton administration. We may not like everything in the package that is DJT, but is it worth it to keep the Clintons out? YES!!

[French G.]

Low bar dude. I woulda voted for a Missouri sock monkey to see HRC stumble off into the sunset.

[Jamisjockey]

In the interest of "fair and balanced", here's one where Trump is wrong IMO. During the "Sheriff's meeting" he joked about ruining the career of the TX state Senator who is fighting asset forfeiture laws in the state. I will concede that Trump was joking about the "ruin the career" thing, and will give him the benefit of doubt that he may not have understood what the Sheriff was referring to.

He needs to educate himself on the topic though. I would be sorely disappointed to see him as a proponent of "forfeiture before conviction".

http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/02/08/republican-tx-state-senator-konni-burton-fires-back-at-trump-sheriff-over-civil-asset-forfeiture/

Trump has repeatedly shown himself to be a police state kind of guy, so if he were educated on the matter he'd probably stand behind the bad joke.

[Ben]

We're going to be saying "Trump is wrong" from time to time over the next 4 to 8 years. Shrug. At least he's better than the last guy, or the other candidate.

I was thinking the other day that Trump is the price we paid to avoid the horror and embarrassment of another Clinton administration. We may not like everything in the package that is DJT, but is it worth it to keep the Clintons out? YES!!

Sure. I make posts like this because I don't want us to turn into the equivalent of "Obama is our savior and how dare you question him?!?" fans. We can like the guy, or not like the guy but appreciate him because he's living rent free in SJW heads, but we should definitely be talking about things he may do that are contrary to the freedoms and philosophy that most of us here embrace.

[TommyGunn]

Trump has repeatedly shown himself to be a police state kind of guy, so if he were educated on the matter he'd probably stand behind the bad joke.

When?  Where? How?   
He wasn't the best candidate in the Republican zoo but IMHO   he's closer to Mother Theresa than Hitler.