Civil Asset Forfeiture

Nothing that fuck has done is great.

 

I thought I heard that even Trump doesn't want him anymore. Something he said when he said when he sat down with the fake news media for an interview.

 

Trump said that if he had known Sessions would recuse himself from the Russia investigation, he wouldn't have hired him.

 

Under what plausible scenario could this ever be "necessary"?

It's policing for profit and further substantiates the view of many that law enforcement in this country is out of control.

 

Doubling down on the WOD.

 

^^^ This, he's stuck in the 50's as far as drugs go.

 

Perhaps at a level where a burden of proof required is somewhat less than that required for a criminal conviction. In other words when most people would agree they are guilty, but it just can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Some criminal enterprises are tough to catch, so maybe this could be a way of curbing that. Even under these rules, I would have to see some evidence that it works and is really necessary.

Also as I stated, the police nor the government get to keep the money. It would go to victims funds, maybe a charity or something like that.

 

You can't just consider the intent of the law, you have to consider all the possible ways an unscrupulous, corrupt, or just plain stupid official could abuse it.

 

So your hatred is he enforces laws passed by congress. I guess after Obama ignoring the federal pot and immigration laws that he swore to uphold it is a shock to your system when some enforces the law

 

There is enforcing the law, then there is zealously going after a particular set of offenders. What he seems to be advocating is the latter. It just so happens those particular crimes more heavily impact minorities. Sort of the opposite of going after insider trading and embezzlement. The law should be applied fairly and evenly. Sentences for drug crimes are already too steep, so there is no point in pushing for max penalties imho.

 

And penalties for white collar crimes are far too lenient. Sell drugs and get life, destroy the life savings of thousands, get a few months of house arrest, if even that.

 

To me the most amusing part of the Sessions issue is that, once again, our boy Trump is shooting his foot completely off with his comments on Sessions and Mueller. Trump popped off and said that he would not tolerate his family's finances being investigated in connection to the Russia investigation. Sure enough, Mueller is investigating Trump's finances. Now what? Will Trump fire him? Will he fire Sessions? He did say that he would not have hired him if he knew that he would bow out of the investigation.
Trump needs to watch his actions very closely. If he fires Mueller that can add to the charges of obstruction of justice. He's going to keep popping off until he gets his ass thrown out of office. I honestly don't think that Trump is smart enough to understand what kind of danger he's placing himself into.

 

So why not hate on Congress that passed the laws? For instance the Democrats could have changed it when they had total control right?

But if the Attorney General can ignore laws by choice is that only ones you prefer? How about if the voting rights act was ignored? Or how about we only be sure to collect taxes on public employees? Or like Obama we could make up ones Congress was unwilling to pass and stop funding to Planned Parenthood? Or some other ludicrous idea.

 

It makes me feel dirty sticking up for 2blue but I don't think you are picking up what he is putting down. He is not saying to ignore laws. He is saying that there is no need for overzealous prosecution of one particular group and the law should be applied evenly.

 

No he falsely implied racism by saying the law targets minorities. That ignores the fact that the same neighborhoods are unfairly impacted by the crime that goes with the drugs. Also overzealous vs the non-enforcement of Federal drug laws under Obama which has states thinking they can legalize pot. Thus creating a no win environment where the federal is ignored or someone has to come in and shut down the businesses that popped up to break the law for profit.

So again he hates Sessions because he has chosen to uphold the laws as passed. Not as it racially balanced, politically correct or fashionable. Yep such a horrid man. Unlike say Holder who chose not to prosecute people that were taped threatening voters because those same people were supporters of his president.

 

Thanks. Couldn't have said it better.

I do blame congress for passing the laws, and the executive branch / FDA for keeping MJ a schedule I drug.

Just to note, I have never tried any controlled substance including MJ. I just think we are spending too much money keeping people in jail for victimless crimes.

 

So again that is Sessions fault how? The Justice Department does not set the list as far as I know. Oh and if it does then why Sessions above the many prior to him that also did not change it.

Whether the law is great or not is not the job of the AG. And again the statement of how horrible he is was based on him actually do the job as it is defined.

 

As stated above by someone else he apparently is pushing for maximum sentences and a major push on drug related crimes. If that is not true, then I have no specific beef with Sessions on this issue. If it is true, then he is not emphasizing the right crimes and making a bad problem worse.