HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Amimnoch » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Breaux Bridge, Louisiana
Home country: United States
Current location: Houston, TX
Member since: Tue Jul 3, 2007, 06:34 AM
Number of posts: 4,142

Journal Archives

Jeff Sessions wants police to take more cash from American citizens

Source: The Washington Post

Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday said he'd be issuing a new directive this week aimed at increasing police seizures of cash and property.

“We hope to issue this week a new directive on asset forfeiture — especially for drug traffickers,” Sessions said in his prepared remarks for a speech to the National District Attorney's Association in Minneapolis. "With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures. No criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime. Adoptive forfeitures are appropriate as is sharing with our partners."

Asset forfeiture is a disputed practice that allows law enforcement officials to permanently take money and goods from individuals suspected of crime. There is little disagreement among lawmakers, authorities and criminal justice reformers that “no criminal should be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime.” But in many cases, neither a criminal conviction nor even a criminal charge is necessary — under forfeiture laws in most states and at the federal level, mere suspicion of wrongdoing is enough to allow police to seize items permanently.

The practice is ripe for abuse. In one case in 2016, Oklahoma police seized $53,000 owned by a Christian band, an orphanage and a church after stopping a man on a highway for a broken taillight. A few years earlier, a Michigan drug task force raided the home of a self-described “soccer mom,” suspecting she was not in compliance with the state's medical marijuana law. They proceeded to take “every belonging” from the family, including tools, a bicycle and her daughter's birthday money

Read more: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jeff-sessions-wants-police-to-take-more-cash-from-american-citizens/ar-BBECcJm?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

Really.. just what this legalized theft from citizens really needed.. expansion. I'm sure this won't be abused, or targeted at the "undesirable" people out there.

Voter decision making flowchart.

My own little creation for deciding which Democrats to, or not to support in future elections.

Like it or not.. this is how we reclaim Congress and the presidency.

Exactly! Especially considering Republican History of obstructionism with SCOTUS votes.

Everybody of course knows the latest travesty of Merrick Garland.

Perhaps people need a refresher of just how MANY times the Democratic Senate Majority has confirmed a Republican nominee, and how few times a Republican Senate has confirmed a Democratic Nominee:

GW Bush got both Souter and Thomas on with Democratic Party Senate majorities.
Reagan got Kennedy on with a Democratic Party Senate Majority.
Ford got J.P. Stevens on - Democratic Party Senate maj.
Nixon got Burger, Blackmun, Lewis Powell, and Rehnquist on.
Ike got Brennan, Whittaker, and Stewart on with that same Democratic Party Senate majority.


Sooooo, they can kiss my f'n ass on "Democratic Party obstructionism".

Yep, 4 justices to issue cert.

With the current SCOTUS numbering 8, I think a 4-4 split is the BEST case that #45 could possibly hope for. Not a chance that Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Breyer, or Kegan would decide to uphold the decision.

Kennedy has long been the wild card, and this is just the kind of federal overreach type of case he's famous for crossing over on.

Justice Roberts has at least a fair chance of crossing over and deciding in our favor. He's been fairly good about maintaining the decisions of the lower courts.

Alito and Thomas have a tendency to align their decisions with conservative causes, but in this case, especially with #45's criticism of the court, it's actually possible that the SCOTUS to give a unanimous decision to uphold the lower court decision..

Damn that would be a SWEEEEEEEEET result.

pissdrips and snowflakes.

Soooo, I'm not sure where this whole "snowflake" meme originated, but I'm more than happy to take ownership of it.

Sure, a snowflake alone is fragile, delicate, and prone to melting. However, in large numbers, which us "snowflakes" make up the majority by the vote, and our numbers in our protests, Snow is a powerful force of nature. Snowflakes in masse will bury homes, wipe out an entire forest when they avalanche down a mountainside, collapse a roof, or strand a vehicle. Snowflakes, when they stand together are a powerful force of nature.

Peeresident Rumpus followers however, I now call them pissdrips in honor of their lord and savior's extra curricular activity preferences. They aren't snowflakes, they are just the drips of piss that will run down trumps leg when he tries to tuck his tiny penis back into his trousers after using the urinal. Pissdrips are powerless, messy, deplorable, undesirable, and stinky.

So from now on, when I address them, I address them as pissdrips.

Today, I'm embracing the second amendment.

I live in Texas, but I do not like guns. As a rule, guns have never been allowed in my home.

This election has changed this. For my husband and I, going back into the closet and hiding isn't an option, we've filed joint income taxes as married for a couple of years now, and claimed the allowable back taxes, so the government has full record of our homosexuality.

Trump hasn't even taken office yet, but the whole atmosphere of this country has changed since that fateful day on November 8th. I have removed the family and friends who supported this monster from my life. We have absolutely NOTHING going for us now. They have a large majority in the house, they have the Senate (not filibuster proof, but I see them going full nuclear and declaring the Democratic minority as traitors and obstructionists to their new order), and they have this monster as their leader, and they are fanatical about him in a way that I've never seen in this country in my lifetime.

Maybe, and hopefully I will never have occasion to use these 3 Glock G17L's that I've purchased, but for once, I am thankful for the second amendment. I will kill before I allow me and my husband to be loaded onto trains or trucks for re-education, or when his brownshirts decide it is time to invade our home and make us pay for our "crimes against nature".

Tomorrow, my husband and I go to the firing range to learn how to use these weapons properly.

(edited title since I am NOT actually changing sides on this issue)

Incredible Hillary commercial! Really drives it home.

Very well done.

George Takei: Vote blue no matter who

I absolutely love the way he speaks.

I'm absolutely Hillary folk, I think they are right.

When it comes to Oregon, I'm thinking they are right, and probably around the 70% range win for Bernie.

I also think they are wrong on Kentucky, i see Kentucky either going strong Hillary, or at best (from their perspective) a narrow Hillary win. I don't see Bernie taking Kentucky.

So, what has Bernie accomplished that is worthy of so much adoration?

Senator Sanders is an INCREDIBLE orator, what has he actually done?

In all of his years in Congress only 3 bill's that he either sponsored, or co-sponsored has been made into law (none of which were particularly ground breaking or of any significant import). He's proven again and again that he's great at saying no, so I'll concede he'll be great at using the Veto power. Heck Hillary was just as successful as he was in only 8 years in Congress (not her greatest accomplishment either imho). However, Hillary had much success in the DOJ, first lady of Arkansas, FLOTUS, and Secretary of State.

So, in short.. What has Bernie DONE that makes him worthy of my (or anybody's) vote??

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »