The Front Page Cover
~ Featuring ~
 Reining in Civil Asset Forfeiture Abuse
by Arnold Ahlert
liar-nObama CIA Director Brennan
Urges Coup Against Trump – Clapper Approves
by Rick Wells
{} ~ It’s no wonder, in fact it seems unavoidable, given the fact that these two dictatorial thugs were in charge of our intelligence... that there is a deep state firmly entrenched and that it is still working to serve the same establishment powers that were in control during the liar-nObama nightmare. CNN leftist Wolf Blitzer interviewed liar-nObama loyalists, former CIA Director John Brennan and DNI James “Not Wittingly” Clapper at the annual leftist, CFR, Neocon confab, the Aspen Security Forum. He quotes an accusatorial hypothetical by Nancy Pulosi, derisively aimed at President Trump, which asked, “What do the Russians have on Donald Trump, politically, personally or financially?” The short answer is, beyond reckless speculation that could be made about anyone, nothing. Put the shoe on another foot, what do the Russians have on Wolf Blitzer that makes him ask such defamatory and unsubstantiated questions about our President? What do the Saudis and Muslim Brotherhood have on John Brennan, Hussein liar-nObama, Robert Mueller and James Clapper to make them so anti-American, caliphate, Sharia and invasion friendly, so pro-Muslim Brotherhood?...
Top suspect in major
Democrat scandal caught fleeing U.S.

by Garth Kant
{} ~ Federal agents arrested the top suspect in a major Democratic hacking scandal at Dulles Airport in Virginia as he tried to flee the U.S. Tuesday and fly to the Mideast... Former House IT staffer Imran Awan was then arraigned in federal court in Washington, and he pleaded not guilty to one count of bank fraud following allegations he tried to defraud the Congressional Federal Credit Union. But he is suspected of much more, including the possible theft of sensitive information from the office computers of numerous Democratic Party lawmakers and sending that data to a secret server. It is a major scandal almost completely ignored by the establishment media...
Every RINO Needs To Go
by Michael Snyder
{} ~ For decades, RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) have been using labels such as “Republican”, “conservative”, “pro-gun” and “pro-life” to get elected... but then once they get into office they govern like Democrats. There was so much hope when Donald Trump won the election last November, but thanks to the RINOs in Congress not much has actually been accomplished so far.  In fact, this is being called “the most unproductive Congress in 164 years”.  Most of us were anticipating that so much would get done over the past 6 months, but instead we have seen nothing but gridlock. The most recent example of this has been the liar-nObamacare debacle...
CAIR Loses San Diego Schools Partnership

by John Rossomando
{} ~ The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) tried to have it both ways – claiming to be a civil rights organization when it suits its purposes, but admitting at other times that its mission is religious... That duplicity has cost CAIR a partnership with San Diego public schools and threatens to sabotage a plan to take an educational program national. San Diego school board members agreed Tuesday night not to work with CAIR on a campaign to specifically fight anti-Muslim bullying generated by an exaggerated CAIR report. Instead, the Anti-Defamation League is poised to work on a program that aims "to comprehensively address the issue of bullying of all students."...
Levin Fears President Trump Will
“Make A Terrible Mistake” Ousting Sessions
by Rick Wells
{} ~ Mark Levin says he’s very concerned. He’s “very concerned that the President and his staff will make a terrible mistake in pushing Attorney General Jeff Sessions out the door... And my concern is the President really needs to stay focused on the staff that needs to go and the staff that doesn’t need to go.” Levin says, “I understand he’s upset that Sessions recused himself. But he will not get a better Attorney General than Jeff Sessions.” Levin says, “Jeff Sessions is solid, he has remained solid, Jeff Sessions is highly regarded in conservative circles and has been for three decades.” “He gave up his Senate slot, which he could have served in for the rest of his life if he had chosen, because the people of Alabama love Jeff Sessions, to serve this President. More than that, he was the first Senator to endorse this President. And one of his top staffers, Stephen Miller, is a top aide to the President and a trusted aide to the President.”...I agree with Levin.
 Reining in Civil Asset Forfeiture Abuse 
By Arnold Ahlert:  On Jan. 20, 2015, the federal government dropped its case against the Hirsch family and returned $446,000 in assets and cash seized by the IRS. The agreement required the Hirschs to pay their own legal fees and cleared the feds of any wrongdoing. The problem? The Hirschs, who own a distribution company on Long Island, were never even charged with a crime, much less convicted. They were victims of civil asset forfeiture, a process whereby government can seize property and cash they suspect is related to the commission of a crime.
          Last Wednesday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered the expansion of civil asset forfeiture laws, insisting they are a "key tool" for enforcement.
          A constitutionally dubious money spigot for government is more like it. And while CBS News painted Sessions' decision as a "reversal" of former AG Eric Holder's policies, the numbers tell a different story. During Holder's tenure from 2009 through early 2015, the yearly dollar value of assets seized by the DOJ went from less than $2 billion to more than $5 billion.
          Holder did indeed receive praise for ending the program. Yet as The Washington Post reported on March 28, 2016, the liar-nObama administration's DOJ — then headed by Loretta Lynch — was "resuming a controversial practice that allows local police departments to funnel a large portion of assets seized from citizens into their own coffers under federal law."
          It was a practice Lynch pursued with vigor during her tenure as U.S. attorney for the eastern district of New York. Her office collected more than $113 million in civil forfeiture actions between 2011 and 2013 — including the $446,000 from the Hirschs.
          "Our country's proud history of opposing government seizures of property goes back to the founding: American colonists protested broad warrants, called 'writs of assistance,' that British customs officers used to hunt for contraband," writes Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT).
          Colonial America was viewed by King George as a financial investment. British lawmakers abided that viewpoint, passing a number of revenue collection bills aimed at extracting as much money as they could from the colonies. When colonists resisted and engaged in smuggling to do so, writs of assistance were issued. They allowed authorities to search a person's property with no notice or reason, and force people to cooperate.
          This egregious overreach was one of the factors precipitating the American Revolution, and the creation of the Fourth Amendment. When it became part of the Constitution, it only applied to the federal government. The Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment expanded its application to the states. Regardless, the Supreme Court has "traditionally affirmed expansive civil forfeiture rules by reference to colonial practices rooted in admiralty, piracy, and customs law," attorney David French explains.
          And Sessions, using the never-ending war on drugs as his rationale, has re-instituted practices known as equitable sharing and adoption. "Those practices permit the federal government to process civil forfeitures on behalf of local officials," Lee explains. "After the forfeiture has been processed and litigated under federal rules, the feds sell the property and give some of the cash back to the local officials. That allows local officials to bypass local laws, which often provide more procedural protections than federal rules. Both the local and federal officials benefit from the racket."
          The move seemingly undermines the 24 states and the District of Columbia that have passed civil forfeiture reform laws since 2014, including three — North Carolina, New Mexico and Nebraska — that have abolished civil forfeiture entirely. At best, Sessions' efforts elicit substantial questions about federalism.
          At worst, they completely mock due process. "In civil forfeiture, authorities don't have to prove guilt, file charges or obtain a conviction before seizing private property," Fox News explains.
          Toward what end? An extensive 2010 report by the Institute for Justice reveals civil forfeiture is really about "policing for profit, as agencies pursue forfeitures to boost their budgets at the expense of other policing priorities."
          That's a bit of an understatement. A report released last April by the DOJ's Office of the Inspector General reveals its forfeiture programs brought in approximately $28 billion over the last decade. Appallingly, the report was based solely on a 100-case sample — because the feds don't keep overall data for further study.
          Those cases revealed that only 44 of the 100 seizures were connected to ongoing investigations, led to additional investigations, or precipitated arrests and/or prosecutions. "When seizure and administrative forfeitures do not ultimately advance an investigation or prosecution, law enforcement creates the appearance, and risks the reality, that it is more interested in seizing and forfeiting cash than advancing an investigation or prosecution," the report stated.
          In an age where government at every level spends more than it takes in, is there any doubt this contemptible method of budget-padding resonates in far too many locales?
          And not just in violation of the Fourth Amendment's "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." The Fifth Amendment states Americans cannot be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." How that squares with law enforcement officials' ability to seize assets prior to any process of law other than an unsubstantiated allegation is anyone's guess.
          Sessions is at loggerheads with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, whose track record on the subject reveals he is distinctly at odds with the practice. In 1993's U.S. v. James Daniel Good Real Property, Thomas stated that he was "disturbed by the breadth of new civil-forfeiture statutes." Three years later, despite deferring to the majority about the seizure of a wife's car after her husband had sex with a prostitute in it, Thomas wrote a separate concurrence, stating those unaware of history and legal precedents "might well assume that such a scheme is lawless — a violation of due process." And despite its ineligibility for Supreme Court review, Thomas nonetheless offered his opinion in Leonard v. Texas, where police again seized assets absent a criminal procedure. "This system — where police can seize property with limited judicial oversight and retain it for their own use — has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses," he wrote.
          These abuses have prompted Congress to act. In March, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced the Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act. A companion bill was introduced by Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) in the House. Paul's bill eliminates equitable sharing; reinstates the principle of innocent until proven guilty; requires clear and convincing evidence; protects the right of counsel; removes the profit incentive; reforms IRS seizures; and requires the DOJ to compile and publish data on seizures.
          The effort appears to have bipartisan support. "There are over 200 editorials arguing to do away with civil forfeitures. It was part of both the Democratic and Republican platforms at last summer's conventions," Institute for Justice senior attorney Darpana Sheth told Fox News. "I can't think of any other issue that enjoys such cross-aisle support."
          One hopes. And one hopes that, given President Donald Trump's oft-stated commitment to law and order, he and Sessions recognize civil asset forfeiture laws are the epitome of an unconstitutional "ends justify the means" approach to law enforcement.  ~The Patriot Post

Views: 14


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center


Facebook & Twitter


BREAKING: Hillary Admits She Was Wrong About ‘Deplorables,’
White Nationalists Only ‘0.15%’ Of U.S. Population

( – Hillary Clinton, the failed liberal presidential candidate who sealed her fate by slamming half of U.S. voters as a load of racist, sexist, xenophobic “deplorables,” just came out and admitted she was wrong, Breitbart reports.

Speaking with Hugh Hewitt on his radio show about her book “What Happened,” he asked her if she actually believes that half of the American population are white nationalists and racists.

“Of the 62.9 million people who voted for President Trump, do you have a number in your mind that you think are actually white nationalist racists of that 62.9 million, a real number?” he asked.

“No, I don’t,” she said.

Still have any doubts? Later in the conversation, Hewitt asked the same question again. “Do you think there are more than a half million, you know, honest-to-God white nationalists running around the United States?”

Clinton: “Probably not, no.”

A white nationalist would like to establish a sovereign country for people of white European heritage, an idea everyone across the political spectrum finds unspeakably intolerable and offensive. Now, the woman who declared that this was the desire of more than half of Americans is saying that virtually nobody wants it. On both counts, she’s completely wrong.

There’s no doubt that Clinton is probably going to try running again for president in 2020 – if she’s even alive that long – and might be trying to absolve her guilt and pander to all those “undecideds” who instantly went MAGA the second she blasted them as no-good racist deplorables for not voting Democrat.

However, Clinton did later admit that there were more white nationalists in America than she had thought. Expressing her worries that the internet and the presidency of Trump is giving them a voice and a platform, she hinted that under her iron scepter, she will attempt to silence them.

“Unfortunately, their views, which used to be quite beyond the mainstream, you know, have a much broader audience now, because you know, of being online and having outlets and media presence that can promote those attitudes,” she said.

How many white nationalists are there in the United States? That’s a question with troublingly few answers, since for some mysterious reason the liberal mainstream media – even though it claims all the time that white supremacy is on the rise – hasn’t actually bothered to take polls and just ask people whether they are white nationalists.

Actually, there’s a simple answer to that. If such a poll were to be taken, our bet is that liberals would be very disappointed to discover that almost nobody is actually a white nationalist, and so there would be no way they could continue scaring people with those fears. A tactic Clinton has apparently given up on.

Left-wingers are entirely convinced that some vague but large majority of people who say they aren’t racists or white nationalists, actually share a lot of views with them – which is why Nazi and white supremacist have become interchangeable with Republican and libertarian.

An article by Newsweek, which polled around 5,000 in order address this very question, came up with this response:

About 70 percent of respondents strongly agreed that people of different races should be “free to live wherever they choose” and that “all races are equal,” and 89 percent agreed that all races should be treated equally. At the same time, 31 percent of respondents said they strongly or somewhat agreed that the country needs to “protect and preserve its White European heritage,” while 34 percent strongly or somewhat disagreed and 29 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed.

Reality is, it’s a little true that some Americans do have overlapping views with white nationalists, but the overwhelming majority of respondents STRONGLY believe that the races should be free, are equal, and should be treated equally. Sounds like none of these respondents would be joining a lynch mob or waging a second Holocaust any time soon – trying to equate the preservation of white heritage with support for slavery and genocide is obviously one of the Left’s biggest lies, and the very reason why 39 percent of people in this same survey believe white people are under attack.

So Clinton changes her mind, and now says she believes less than one percent of the American population are white nationalists – did she believe there were even LESS than that during the campaign trail? Either way, she’s either just lying or plain stupid.


© 2017   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service