Trump Attacks Jeff Sessions on Twitter

[Pb]

Good grief, on what planet is this a good idea?   

Sessions was one of your best supporters!

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-could-happen-if-jeff-sessions-resigns-2017-7

[griz]

When I glanced at the title I saw "Trump attacks Jetsons".  What's scary is that it was believable to me.

[K Frame]

Well, even though I grudgingly came around to support him because the alternative option was just so much more freaking horrible, the Trump presidency is going just about how I expected it to go.

[TommyGunn]

Trump  is our:

[RocketMan]

I think many of us have come to the realization that Trump is going to be a one term president.
There is also a real possibility that both houses of Congress will change hands during the mid-terms.  With all the broken promises, Republicans are pretty fed up and likely to stay home, giving the Dems a clear playing field to elect their folks.

[DittoHead]

It appears to me that the guy who is so famous for yelling 'You're fired' doesn't have the balls to actually fire Sessions. Instead he has adopted the strategy of a teenage girl - be mean on twitter and spread rumors.

[TommyGunn]

I think many of us have come to the realization that Trump is going to be a one term president.

Nahhh.  If Obama could win a second term, it's a cinch Trump can as well.  

[TommyGunn]

It appears to me that the guy who is so famous for yelling 'You're fired' doesn't have the balls to actually fire Sessions. Instead he has adopted the strategy of a teenage girl - be mean on twitter and spread rumors.

He has the balls, but he knows it would look BAD and that Sessions has many admirers in Dixie (like me, for instance) and wants to be able to claim he didn't fire him, he left for his own reasons.

[K Frame]

Jeff Sessions lost any and all support he might have had from me when he doubled down on the *expletive deleted*ing unconstitutional abomination known as Civil Asset Forfeiture.

Were I a federal judge I'd sign a CAF writ on him and all of his possessions on the theory that he was personally enriched by colluding with Russia -- and then let him prove that he's *expletive deleted*ing innocent.

[TommyGunn]

Jeff Sessions lost any and all support he might have had from me when he doubled down on the *expletive deleted*ing unconstitutional abomination known as Civil Asset Forfeiture.

Were I a federal judge I'd sign a CAF writ on him and all of his possessions on the theory that he was personally enriched by colluding with Russia -- and then let him prove that he's *expletive deleted*ing innocent.

So you're OK with the French system of law where one must prove innocence with government officials, while citizens are innocent until proven guilty?





Just asking.

[Ben]

So you're OK with the French system of law where one must prove innocence with government officials, while citizens are innocent until proven guilty?





Just asking.

Not to speak  for Mike,  but it appears you completely misread what he wrote.

[dogmush]

Of course HE'S innocent until proven guilty.




......




It's his house, cars, and stock portfolio that are guilty.  No one's putting Mr. Sessions in jail.

[Perd Hapley]

What's funny about Trump firing his own people is that the Left must then reverse course on all the character assassination they engaged in when those people were hired.

[K Frame]

So you're OK with the French system of law where one must prove innocence with government officials, while citizens are innocent until proven guilty?





Just asking.

Do you have clue *expletive deleted*ing one what civil asset forfeiture is?

How it's used?

Defenses against it?

Just asking...

[TommyGunn]

Do you have clue *expletive deleted*ing one what civil asset forfeiture is?

How it's used?

Defenses against it?

Just asking...

Yes I have a   expletive deleted clue what it is.  

I am really sorry to get thy Godly Hackles up.

Let me 'Splain something;  
In my 60+  years of existance on this sorry planet,  there have been politicians I like that have done/said things with which I disagree, sometimes strongly.  There  have also been politicians I have despised,  disagreed with,  or thought were total jackwagons, who did or said things I actually did agree with.  If you want purity,   IMHO  you're pretty much  f**ked in this plane of existance.

I suspect  you probably know that,  but what are you willing to do about it?    
You can abstain from politics altogether.   That might be the most viable choice,  but some claim if you do this,  you lose the right to complain.  You dont,  of course,  but you do lose a certain "gravitas,"  since you aren't participating why should people consider your opinion important ---- you not being a" mover or a shaker?"
Or you can vote 3rd party.  For someone who's polling at 2% on his good days.   Fine,   and I'm sure you'll sleep well at night.  
So will the socialist Cadre when they win the 2024 election and get to take 50%  of your stuff and give it to an illegal alien.
And wishing that the majority of other voters had voted for the two percenter will be cold comfort.

In most cases of civil forfeiture,  the property taken belongs to cocaine smugglers,  cartel thugs,  Cosa Nostra or Mafia types,  and others of that ilk.  Forfeiture may be a questionable law at best,  or a horrible one at worst,  but the vast majority of people it hits are people for whom I have no sympathy.  Sorry,  I dont.  And the nasty reality is that you will never convince the American people, in general, that a law is bad by pointing out its victims when they are criminal scum.
Yes,   I have heard about the RARE case where a guy driving across America with $20,000 in cash is stopped,  the cash is grabbed,
since there is some assumption people carrying legal tender for all debts public and private must be drug couriers.
Or someone innocently lends his car to a friend who uses it to transport $120,000 in illegal drugs gets himself arrested, and the coppers get themselves a new  car.  
Situations like that have offended many people,  and what Sessions, et al, are suggesting is a protection from that sort of thing, while reinstating it against the criminal element.

It isn't my favorite law,  even with those supposed "protections."   I have a lot of "NOT FAVORITE LAWs"  that were I the Benevolent Dictator,  I'd do away with.
But I'm not.  All I can do is vote,  usually for the lesser evil.  And sorry,  in my opinion,  ALL humans are,  to some degree, evil,  as we are "fallen."   Only God is perfect.
I vote,  and hope not to "throw the baby out with the bathwater."  

My comment regarding "the French system"  was in response to your ostensible hypocrisy regarding how you would deal with public figures as opposed to private persons.  In truth I believe you wrote "tongue in cheek"  to make a point.
I suppose I really ought to have put a smiley there to signify that but hindsight is 20/20.

There are a lot of things in our system to rail against.   If you make a 24/7/365 profession of it you'll only drive your blood pressure up, your mind nuts, and your corporeal self into an early grave,  and the politicians enjoy it.

What's the old prayer?;

" God grant me the courage to change what I can, the patience to deal with what I cannot,  and the wisdom to know the difference."

Take care.

[Perd Hapley]

http://thefederalist.com/2017/07/25/democrats-continue-insist-fine-find-people-guilty-proving/

Due process for everyone! (Except gun owners, people with funny names who land on secret government watchlists and students who are accused of rape.)

[griz]

.......
Situations like that have offended many people,  and what Sessions, et al, are suggesting is a protection from that sort of thing, while reinstating it against the criminal element.........

Here is a description of what Sessions has directed:

"The directive revives the Justice Department’s Equitable Sharing Program, a controversial process through which state and local police agencies can seize assets, then transfer those seizures to federal control. In doing so, local agencies can skirt some state-level regulations limiting forfeitures. Under the program, the federal government pools the funds derived from the assets and sends 80 percent of them back to the state or local department itself, sometimes evading state laws that say seized assets should go into a state’s general fund."

Where is the part you mentioned about protection from predatory seizures?  Sounds more like subsidized robbery to me.

[TommyGunn]

I don't believe the protections I listed were in Session's  statement.   
I don't think you mean "subsidized robbery,"  what you're talking about is called "theft under the color of law."

[K Frame]

Oh chill out. My hackles were already up because of that incredible tool Sessions and his BS moves at attorney general.

It's cute that you think my response was all about you.

"I suspect  you probably know that,  but what are you willing to do about it?"

Right, here we go. You calling me to man the ramparts, Mme Defarge? 

[griz]

Yes, I do indeed mean theft under color of law.  That's the point.  Am I misunderstanding your post I quoted?  It sounded to me like you were saying Sessions was offering protections against abuse.  If so, what protections?

[Ben]

Here is a description of what Sessions has directed:

"The directive revives the Justice Department’s Equitable Sharing Program, a controversial process through which state and local police agencies can seize assets, then transfer those seizures to federal control. In doing so, local agencies can skirt some state-level regulations limiting forfeitures. Under the program, the federal government pools the funds derived from the assets and sends 80 percent of them back to the state or local department itself, sometimes evading state laws that say seized assets should go into a state’s general fund."

Where is the part you mentioned about protection from predatory seizures?  Sounds more like subsidized robbery to me.

Pretty much the whole thing needed to be bolded. This is one of the things Sessions is doing that's pissing me off the most (if there is evidence to the contrary, someone please link it).

To Tommygunn's point, let's, for the sake of argument, concede that on the FEDERAL level, 90% of forfeitures involve major criminals (let's also set constitutional rights and pre-conviction aside for a minute).

The problem, as outlined in the bolded statement, is that probably 98% of the false forfeitures (I'm not using illegal, because to me they are all constitutionally illegal) are committed by state and local LE. They are not rare. Cursory googling will reveal lots of examples. That other 10% on the Federal level? Hello IRS and >$10K cash deposits. On the state and local level, this stuff is used WAY too much specifically because of the evasion by LE of state restrictions that with the help of the feds, puts these seized assets in the hands of local Barney Fife. There is just way too much room for small town Boss Hoggs and big city dirty cops to absolutely abuse this.

Better a hundred drug dealers go free than one Apu from the Quikie Mart have his possessions confiscated.

[MechAg94]

My first thought when I heard about this is what is Trump doing with the left hand while the right hand creates a Twitter distraction.

These are the two recent tweets I see mentioning Sessions.  I guess this doesn't get me all that worked up.  And this is 2 out of 2 dozen the last few days.  

"Attorney General Jeff Sessions has taken a VERY weak position on Hilary Clinton crimes (where are Emails & DNC server) & intel leakers"

"so why aren't the Committees and investigators, and of course our beleaguered A.G., looking into Crooked Hillary's crimes & Russia relations?"

[MechAg94]

Trump  is our:

We started that other thread with the list of accomplishments.  I can tolerate a lot if someone is getting some things done and pissing off Democrats and the media like Trump has.  

We will have Trump for 8 years, IMO.

[Hawkmoon]

He has the balls, but he knows it would look BAD and that Sessions has many admirers in Dixie (like me, for instance) and wants to be able to claim he didn't fire him, he left for his own reasons.

When Sessions came out in favor of expanding civil asset forfeiture, he lost any supportive thoughts I might have harbored about him.

After that, he can take a long walk off a short pier. I don't care if he quits or is fired, I want him gone. He obviously doesn't understand the Constitution.

[Firethorn]

Or someone innocently lends his car to a friend who uses it to transport $120,000 in illegal drugs gets himself arrested, and the coppers get themselves a new  car.  
Situations like that have offended many people,  and what Sessions, et al, are suggesting is a protection from that sort of thing, while reinstating it against the criminal element.

The case I remember it was the mother, and the son was busted with $120 in cop math weed.
There was also the motel owner with a tendency to call the cops whenever a druggie checked into his motel to let them know that somebody was being unsubtle.  They tried to take his motel because, as an agent put it, they were looking for properties with equity, to maximize income.

They've taken as little as $40 with the accusation not that it is drug money, but that it will be used to buy drugs, merely because the people were driving to a big city like Houston.  They've targeted minorities explicitly, and even threatened to take parent's kids away, to get them to sign over the cash.

Note that Jeff Sessions isn't actually a politician.  He's an appointed bureaucrat.  People here seem to be mad at him, not Trump, his appointed.

We can be mad at him just fine.