Jeff Session is so out of touch...

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jef...z&ocid=U221DHP

Jeff Sessions wants police to take more cash from American citizens

.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jef...z&ocid=U221DHP

Jeff Sessions wants police to take more cash from American citizens

. Originally Posted by WTF

You want us to give CRIMINALS/TYT sympathy?

---> http://www.dailywire.com/news/18655/...ey-john-nolte#

Our Corrupt Media Is Now Haunted By All The Precedents They Set While Colluding With Obama

ByJOHN NOLTE
@NolteNC

July 17, 2017

Barack Obama trafficked guns to Mexican drug lords, secretly delivered pallets filled with billions in cash to Iran's America/Jew-hating mullahs, left four Americans to die in Benghazi and then lied about it, allowed his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to exchange government favors for hundreds of millions of dollars slushed into the Clinton Foundation, sic'd his IRS on everyday, law-abiding Americans, and used a trillion dollars in "stimulus" funds to pay off his cronies, like those behind a boondoggle called Solyndra.

And all along, over eight terrible years, our media did a whole lot more than just let Obama get away with it. They wholeheartedly colluded. They allowed Obama to persecute them through the Department of Justice and to lie to our face (remember: I just now read about it in the newspaper, the IRS did nothing wrong, you can keep your insurance). And when that wasn't enough, the media mercilessly attacked as racist anyone who criticized the Precious and ginned up nothingburgers like Todd Akin to distract from those four dead Americans. And when even that wasn't enough, they themselves lied and obfuscated, covered up and dissembled, and most of all they set all kinds of precedents that, in a delicious form of irony, are now driving this utterly failed institution to the edge of insanity.

The very same media that shrugged when Hillary Clinton set up a secret server, deleted 33,000 government emails, BleachBit'd whatever remained and then literally took a hammer to the devices — the media that set that precedent now wants us to get all worked up over Trump's tweets?

The very same media that buried Bill Clinton's perjury and his numerous victims of sexual abuse — the media that set those precedents now wants us to consider an Access Hollywood video a disqualifier for the presidency? Now wants us to freak out over an awkward handshake?

The very same media that gushed over Barack Obama's magical ability to "slow-walk the truth" — the media that set that precedent now wants us to impeach Trump over how the details of his son's meeting with a Russian lawyer have been released?

The very same media that joined Obama in pointing and laughing at Mitt Romney's concern over Russia, the very same media that told us Obama's serial-appeasement of Russia (refusing Poland missile defense, "more flexibility after the election") was in reality an extraordinary form of statesmanship — the media that set those precedents now wants us to toss Trump out on his ear because he's hoping to work with Putin?

The very same media that covered up the fact that Democrats and Team Hillary worked with the foreign government of Ukraine in the hopes of digging up dirt on Trump, the media that itself has used opposition research from the Russian government (the Golden Showers dossier) in the hopes of destroying Trump — the media that set those precedents now want us to turn on Trump because his son hoped for the same?

The very same media that again and again used "Republican overreach" as a tactic to damage the GOP whenever a Democrat scandal rose up — the media that set that precedent now wants us to side with them when the Trump administration chooses to communicate directly through social media?

The very same media that asked 23 follow-up questions of Trump and none of Hillary — the media that set that precedent now wants us to side with them when the White House limits the press briefings they can peacock in?

The very same media that said nothing when Obama hired a 9-11 Truther as a Czar (and later hired him as one of their own) — the media that set that precedent wants us to be upset over Ivanka and Jared?

The very same media that showed absolutely no interest in recovering even one of Hillary's 33,000 illegally deleted emails — the media that set that precedent, now wants us to share their outrage over the fact that Don Jr. tried to recover them in a 20-minute meeting?

And now — now! — this very same media (with the help of #NeverTrump's forever-preening moral narcissists) is using the spear of Muh Principles to demand that those of us on the political right agree to destroy ourselves in their corrupt crusade, that we acquiesce like second-class citizens to their separate sets of rules?

Like hell.

Hey, SLOBBRIN, why couldn't you post the whole muhfucking rant in your signature line? Despite posts to the contrary, we all know you lack the basic intelligence to complete and express an original thought.

You want us to give CRIMINALS/TYT sympathy?

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

You think it ok to seize folks property and funds , without a conviction?

WTF is so out of touch he makes Sessions look passable.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jef...z&ocid=U221DHP

Jeff Sessions wants police to take more cash from American citizens

. Originally Posted by WTF

This is nothing new. Police have confiscated property that was obtained by illegal drug transactions, money laundering and other crimes where criminals benefited from their criminal activity for decades. Sessions is doing no more than expanding the scope of legality for which authorities can confiscate such property.


Jim

Trump should have fired his ass right after he recused himself from the Russian investigation. Holder and Lynch didn't recuse themselves under more obvious circumstances.

'Presumption of Innocence' and 'Innocent until proven guilty' are pretty basic parts of the USA, surprised everyone doesn't protest this practice.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encycloped...law-30183.html

http://police.laws.com/illegal/illeg...ch-and-seizure

Leave it like it is.

police shouldn't seize other peoples property without due process.

police shouldn't seize other peoples property without due process. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

i agree. this law was put in place in the rush to deal with the aftermath of 9/11. now it's begun to go too far. on the one hand, people traveling with very large amounts of cash are nothing but suspicious. but are they criminal for doing so? maybe .. maybe not. it depends. my big issue is that if no charges are filed, people should automatically get their property back. that's in line with due process. as Jim noted, seizing assets is nothing new and existed well before this post 9/11 world. the other side of this is that even if no charges are filed, it's a legal fight to get back the property. it shouldn't be. here is an example showing how arbitrary these seizures can happen, and note that the money in full is going to be returned once the DA determined there was no grounds, either civil or criminal.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.da04138c23cf

UPDATE: On Monday afternoon, Muskogee County District Attorney Orvil Loge dropped both the civil and criminal charges against Eh Wah. In an interview with The Washington Post, Loge said "I looked at the case and met with the officers, and determined that we would not be able to meet the burden of proof in the criminal case and in the civil case." Loge said a check for the full amount of money taken from Eh Wah will be mailed to Eh Wah's lawyers as soon as possible.

police shouldn't seize other peoples property without due process. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

They don't. Property is only seized if there is a connection with an illegal transaction. I don't have much sympathy for a thief. Especially if he is ripping people off and his illegal activities are the sole means of income to finance a lavish lifestyle.

Jim

'Presumption of Innocence' and 'Innocent until proven guilty' are pretty basic parts of the USA, surprised everyone doesn't protest this practice. Originally Posted by futbolhead

Not to mention the right to due process.

I never could understand how these laws pass Constitutional Muster.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jef...z&ocid=U221DHP

Jeff Sessions wants police to take more cash from American citizens

. Originally Posted by WTF

From DRUG dealers and smugglers, not general folk. BUT imo for any asset seziure, there should be a conviction, NOT just an arrest with no charge..

You think it ok to seize folks property and funds , without a conviction? Originally Posted by WTF

Hell no..

This is nothing new. Police have confiscated property that was obtained by illegal drug transactions, money laundering and other crimes where criminals benefited from their criminal activity for decades. Sessions is doing no more than expanding the scope of legality for which authorities can confiscate such property.


Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

That is true. BUT where me and WTF agree on, is its WRONG to take money and property, from people, just cause they merely got arrested, but never got charged or convicted..

'Presumption of Innocence' and 'Innocent until proven guilty' are pretty basic parts of the USA, surprised everyone doesn't protest this practice. Originally Posted by futbolhead

Legally yes. BUT we see 'trial in the court of public opinion all the time!

I never could understand how these laws pass Constitutional Muster.

Nor can i understand how all the anti gun laws on the books pass constitutional muster..