President Trump speaks out strongly against reforming civil forfeiture laws

damn, I was just starting to like him too... but he really $#@!ed up on that one. Not acceptable if that is his position.

Trump invites sheriff to 'destroy' Texas state lawmaker who opposes asset forfeiture


President Donald Trump invited the sheriff of a small Texas County to “destroy” the career of a state senator who sought to ban a controversial law enforcement practice by naming the lawmaker during a White House meeting.

At a listening session with county sheriffs from around the country, Trump invited the sheriffs seated in the White House’s Roosevelt Room to make a statement while reporters were present. Rockwall County, Texas, Sheriff Harold Eavenson spoke up first to discuss asset forfeiture, a practice by which law enforcement can seize the cash and property of individuals suspected of committing a crime without a guilty verdict.

Proponents of the practice argue that allows law enforcement to effectively combat terrorism and the drug trade, while opponents, including some conservatives, argue that it allows police to seize assets without due process. Trump’s predecessor, former President Barack Obama, sought to rein in an asset sharing program by which local law enforcement were given a share of whatever assets they seized.

“On asset forfeiture, we’ve got a state senator in Texas that was talking about introducing legislation to require conviction before we could receive that forfeiture money,” Eavenson said.

“Can you believe that?” Trump interjected.

“And I told him that the cartel would build a monument to him in Mexico if he could get that legislation passed,” the Texas sheriff continued.

“Who is the state senator? Do you want to give his name? We’ll destroy his career,” Trump replied, presumably suggesting that the lawmaker would suffer for holding a position contrary to the president’s.

The president’s remark elicited laughter from those gathered in the Roosevelt Room, although the president did not join in. Eavenson did not offer the Texas state senator’s name, and the public information officer for the Rockwall County sheriff's office did not immediately return a phone call seeking clarity on which lawmaker the sheriff was referring to in his White House remarks.

Earlier in the listening session, during Eavenson's introduction to the group, the sheriff told Trump that his county "is probably 85 percent Republican, so it was pretty easy for you" and added later that "we're very proud to have you as president." Rockwall County did indeed strongly support Trump in the last election, although not quite to the extent that Eavenson suggested: the county's election results website shows that just over 77 percent of those who cast a straight party-line ballot voted for Republicans, while slightly less than 71 percent of those who opted to pick individual candidates cast their votes for Trump.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...e-texas-234740

Un $#@!ing acceptable.

So glad I never got on the Trump train....

of course, he's free to flip flop on this issue -you know, if he ever got arrested and had his assets stolen
what a putz

And all the boiling frogs cheered - because it wasn't Hillary that was turning up the heat.

RPOS

It's cool though, because if they beat you down, take your stuff and you are found not guilty, you can always just sue the police.

The fact that he appears to feel very strongly about this is what is particularly disturbing. So much so that I don't think he is ever going to flip-flop back on it, like he does on many issues. That combined with the confirmation of Jeff Sessions who is the biggest defender of civil forfeiture in congress is very worrying.

How did they think he was going to get control of the land needed to build the wall?

Originally Posted by jct74

The fact that he appears to feel very strongly about this is what is particularly disturbing. So much so that I don't think he is ever going to flip-flop back on it, like he does on many issues. That combined with the confirmation of Jeff Sessions who is the biggest defender of civil forfeiture in congress is very worrying.

You are probably right.

There is nothing to be done but press on.

He is much better than Hillary on a number of things.

Horrible on this issue...so apply what pressure we can through people like Rand and Amash to push back against this.

Rand needs to grill Sessions unmercifully on this.

And where is Gorsuch on this issue?

Originally Posted by jct74

damn, I was just starting to like him too... but he really $#@!ed up on that one. Not acceptable if that is his position.

And get this, we don't know who he was talking about but the three legislators mentioned here are all liberty.

“Who is the state senator?” Trump asked Eavenson. “Do you want to give his name? We’ll destroy his career,” Trump added, and the room burst into laughter. Eavenson laughed, but refused to identify the senator.
While it is unclear who the sheriff was referring to, the bill to abolish civil asset forfeiture was introduced in December by Texas state senator Konni Burton. The bill would require a felony conviction before law enforcement could seize the individual’s property.

A similar bill was introduced by another Texas lawmaker, Rep. David Simpson, in 2015. That bill also related “to repealing civil asset forfeiture provisions and establishing criminal asset forfeiture in this state.” However Simpson’s bill died in in the June 2015 legislative session after it was met by objections from law enforcement.

Rockwall County is represented by Texas state senator Bob Hall.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/tasneemnash...jk#.cfrlnyL62Y

Originally Posted by Superfluous Man

There are only a few positions he has exhibited great zeal for consistently over many years, whether running for office or not, and supporting cops in anything and everything is one of the most evident ones.

Yes, this is true.

Originally Posted by Anti Federalist

You are probably right.

There is nothing to be done but press on.

He is much better than Hillary on a number of things.

Horrible on this issue...so apply what pressure we can through people like Rand and Amash to push back against this.

Well he's talking about ending the career of one of the few elected officials to share the views of Rand and Amash. Its the stuff of nightmares for liberty activists. Hillary trying that would have just helped our guys.

well latinxs often carry all their money on them
not able to get bank accounts
gotta pay for that wall somehow

Originally Posted by Superfluous Man

There are only a few positions he has exhibited great zeal for consistently over many years, whether running for office or not, and supporting cops in anything and everything is one of the most evident ones.

Eminent Domain being another- which asset forfeiture essentially is.

Matches everything about him. Remember the private land he tried to seize in Scotland.

Originally Posted by William Tell

Well he's talking about ending the career of one of the few elected officials to share the views of Rand and Amash. Its the stuff of nightmares for liberty activists. Hillary trying that would have just helped our guys.

Hillary trying that would have just helped our guys.

Yes. No reason for republicans to act like republicans -but they always (majority of them) act like politicians -guaranteed.
h/t to Dr. Ron Paul for clearing that all up for me a few years ago. Doctors and the unpleasant truth... give it to me straight Doctor Paul, I can take it!

Even Trump supporters know better than to back him on this one on the RPF's.