General Discussion

BannonsLiver

(20,603 posts)

7. Most state AG's support asset forfeiture on some level

Tue Jul 25, 2017, 11:19 PM

Jul 2017

Sort of goes with the territory. I'm more interested in where she is on climate change, the minimum wage, healthcare and voter supression. How she would restore our democracy after Putin's coup and where she is on regulating business.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

169 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Kamala Harris supports Civil Forfeiture? [View all] question everything Jul 2017 OP

I won't. BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #1

Your link is behind a paywall. Please find something that isn't. Thanks in advance! N/t emulatorloo Jul 2017 #2

Sorry about that. Will the National Review do? question everything Jul 2017 #6

Thanks! emulatorloo Jul 2017 #12

The national Review is a right wing source...and if you check, Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #101

Not according to a link provided down #11 says this question everything Jul 2017 #114

throwing untrue dirt heaven05 Jul 2017 #130

Right ...the one you provided was incomplete I post a link where it discussed the bill she Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #136

This is bullshit. She sponsored a bill to freeze assets of criminals gangs and such... Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #100

Hafta say, being a BIG Kamala supporter, this IS somewhat concerning. InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2017 #3

Most state AG's support asset forfeiture on some level BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #7

Some states prohibit it question everything Jul 2017 #14

Fair enough. BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #17

The California bill did not become law... Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #103

But freezing isn't keeping? I need to know more before bashing someone already targeted by the GOP bettyellen Jul 2017 #127

Having the Mpls. cops continuously investigated by BainsBane Jul 2017 #144

Yes... why I said only "somewhat" concerning. InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2017 #43

It is bullshit...another hit piece...they will destroy all of our candidates. Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #102

Last week. yallerdawg Jul 2017 #4

Nobody's perfect. But it is disturbing, even if it was kinda her job to support it. TreasonousBastard Jul 2017 #5

I don't think it was her job to support it. David__77 Jul 2017 #57

Sure they can. And while I don't like this, I want to see the rest of her record. TreasonousBastard Jul 2017 #89

The mindset of a prosecutor is a little warped. DefenseLawyer Jul 2017 #8

I was going to say I'm not thrilled with prosecutors as our leaders. Hassin Bin Sober Jul 2017 #18

Why don't we just find fault and eliminate every Dem...then we can just have GOP government Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #109

This is an interesting observation question everything Jul 2017 #116

I'm also for civil asset (of large fortunes) forfeiture meow2u3 Jul 2017 #9

Except that these foreitures often go after lower middle class, mom and pop question everything Jul 2017 #53

If she has Presidential ambitions tazkcmo Jul 2017 #10

Her problem is her speeches and interviews are flat Cicada Jul 2017 #34

Like Bernie, Elizabeth does hava way of firing up a crowd like we haven't seen since the Obama days InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2017 #44

Adam Schiff looks promising. nt tblue37 Jul 2017 #90

Yeah, also Tom Perez, Klobuchar Cicada Jul 2017 #98

I like Schiff too. I'd vote for him! Auntie Bush Jul 2017 #132

Like Adam too! InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2017 #140

We need young blood...I don't want to run either...I like Elizabeth Warren, Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #107

Thank you for guiding me to Joe Kennedy Iii Cicada Jul 2017 #134

He is very impressive. Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #135

Sorry- a good head of hair and a last name arent enough, in my book Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #149

He seems smart, empathic, articulate Cicada Jul 2017 #151

It's not so much about consuming drugs, it's about ending the idiocy that is cannabis prohibition. Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #152

Buttigieg! The name HELPs Cicada Jul 2017 #154

What I want more than anything, for 2020, is a big, broad field of candidates and a vigorous debate Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #156

Absolutely. Everybody imaginable should run. Cicada Jul 2017 #161

I could live with Sherrod... but, Elizabeth is as vibrant as ever! InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2017 #141

I don't think she can win a presidential race Also we have a Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #147

All fair points... but, I wouldn't count Elizabeth out. InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2017 #164

All fair points... but, I wouldn't count Elizabeth out. InAbLuEsTaTe Jul 2017 #165

Article discussing the 2015 bill... PoliticAverse Jul 2017 #11

And there it is. yallerdawg Jul 2017 #15

edit: may have spoken too soon...comment still below. JCanete Jul 2017 #24

First time I've heard of this term was at a progressive meeting question everything Jul 2017 #58

Yeah it does do wonders, but I did already edit at the top, suggesting that I'd been too hasty JCanete Jul 2017 #110

I am throwing my opinion in and I agree with you. If by chance it is ever passed, make a minimum lim Jim Beard Jul 2017 #129

Of course. This is what we say. But the reason why local police love it is that question everything Jul 2017 #143

But the issue is seizing property of people not convicted of crimes. aikoaiko Jul 2017 #38

I think you will find GaryCnf Jul 2017 #42

That is how I understand it, but I can't say I've seen statistics. aikoaiko Jul 2017 #115

If she can't charge them with a crime, theaocp Jul 2017 #52

They are being charged with a crime. yallerdawg Jul 2017 #54

That's how asset forfeiture has worked for decades plus. theaocp Jul 2017 #56

I don't know what to say. yallerdawg Jul 2017 #59

This seems relevant (from the article): theaocp Jul 2017 #79

You missed the article ! yallerdawg Jul 2017 #81

The other article also talks about freezing assets theaocp Jul 2017 #80

The article which started this thread you are commenting on... yallerdawg Jul 2017 #83

I don't recall saying anything about her being "disqualified" theaocp Jul 2017 #84

I'm disagreeing with the OP. yallerdawg Jul 2017 #85

Okay, then. theaocp Jul 2017 #87

From the ACLU? question everything Jul 2017 #62

And they actually reference a single case in 2015! yallerdawg Jul 2017 #70

Very good, Thanks. It is nice to see it in Black and White lazer print. Very clear. Jim Beard Jul 2017 #131

Your last sentence is why Dems will never beaglelover Jul 2017 #13

Obviously I will vote for the Demcoratic candidate in November question everything Jul 2017 #65

As a San Franciscan I am familar with Kamala -- Hell Hath No Fury Jul 2017 #16

Interesting BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #20

+1. N/t obnoxiousdrunk Jul 2017 #21

you aren't troubled by a politician who is ambitious for higher office ? JI7 Jul 2017 #25

LOL...no. BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #27

Anyone in the running is ambitious, to claim otherwise is crazy. It's only seen as a negative for bettyellen Jul 2017 #128

Yes, this is my first reactin too. And yet, when you realize that the other was Loretta Sanchez question everything Jul 2017 #67

Of course she did. Hell Hath No Fury Jul 2017 #71

"official candidates" BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #74

No, there are "official" Democratic candidates here. Hell Hath No Fury Jul 2017 #88

I have little to no interest in SF city politics BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #113

I don't know. Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #35

wrong obamanut2012 Jul 2017 #39

BURN THE WITCH!!!! Foamfollower Jul 2017 #19

Forfeiture laws suck. Qutzupalotl Jul 2017 #22

Of course this can be abused. So can making it impossible to seize these assets. JCanete Jul 2017 #23

The same could be achived by simply -freezing- those assets, too, no? Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #29

I see. That does make sense. Is that what this pivots on? Freezing vs seizing? Is seizing a done JCanete Jul 2017 #30

It's a done deal for poor people because they have sue to get their assets back. Hassin Bin Sober Jul 2017 #31

Oh okay, thanks for the context of its typical usage. Sounds shitty then. nt JCanete Jul 2017 #32

Yeah, I think part of the problem- a big part- is the financial incentive to LEOs. Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #33

It's not a big part of the problem. theaocp Jul 2017 #55

Here is the ACLU opinion, so you don't need to accept the WSJ question everything Jul 2017 #68

thank you for the link. I definitely stand corrected on this one. nt JCanete Jul 2017 #106

I'm okay with it to a certain degree AFTER a conviction. phleshdef Jul 2017 #26

Whoever we run next time is gonna need to be clear on many issues, like ending the drug war for good Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #28

As always, sounds good won't happen...states can do as they please and with Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #146

Spare people the lectures. As if we're all errant children who havent been working for Democrats Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #148

Most people are against the drug war...and I expect that the Democratic candidate will certainly say Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #155

basically, you presume this is stuff people don't already know. Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #157

I have to admit GaryCnf Jul 2017 #36

I'll admit to being uneducated on this Why can't forfeited assets go to a trust? Ilsa Jul 2017 #37

Some answers GaryCnf Jul 2017 #40

Thank you. Ilsa Jul 2017 #45

Here is a Vice program piece on the issue Hassin Bin Sober Jul 2017 #49

Starting already ? treestar Jul 2017 #41

? - I'm pretty new GaryCnf Jul 2017 #46

Yeah here's how it goes BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #77

I like her, and think she has a great future Tom Rinaldo Jul 2017 #47

I could see supporting her in a campaign for president. David__77 Jul 2017 #64

Well said. Thank you question everything Jul 2017 #117

Forfeiture, with some rules, I can support. Calista241 Jul 2017 #48

Those look like reasonable rules to me. David__77 Jul 2017 #63

Has Our Revolution decided Kamila Harris is the next Cory Booker? Expecting Rain Jul 2017 #50

What do you think about seizing assets of people not found guilty of a crime? David__77 Jul 2017 #61

I care about it BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #91

Exactly GaryCnf Jul 2017 #93

It is a useful took in dealing with the Mafia and gangs...but what Harris promoted was freezing Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #111

That is very obvious on twitter nini Jul 2017 #78

Yes, she is the new Cory Booker. It was inevitable. JHan Jul 2017 #82

+1 no doubt about it. I see it any time Harris' name is brought up. BannonsLiver Jul 2017 #92

Well... Oubaas Jul 2017 #51

I think assets should only be held in trust during a speedy trial, at most. David__77 Jul 2017 #60

Maybe we should make her wear a hair shirt. DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2017 #66

I don't agree. David__77 Jul 2017 #73

I voted for her too... DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2017 #75

All ur faves are problematic. WhiskeyGrinder Jul 2017 #69

It's not a deal breaker for me NobodyHere Jul 2017 #72

Also I think everyone should watch John Oliver's take on CAF NobodyHere Jul 2017 #76

Excellent! Thank you for posting question everything Jul 2017 #122

I'm fine with the idea GaryCnf Jul 2017 #86

I saw that she personally opposes the death penalty mvd Jul 2017 #94

I linked to an article GaryCnf Jul 2017 #95

That could be true. But it would probably create a lot of hassle for her if she didn't mvd Jul 2017 #96

More than understandable GaryCnf Jul 2017 #97

I am sick of the hit pieces on Sen. Harris. Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #99

Spot On! Expecting Rain Jul 2017 #104

Yes this began with the GOP media. Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #139

We need to denounce our revolution and warn candidates if you are involved with this group Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #145

Ohhhh this was only meant for "nefarious purposes" money. Why didn't you say so! Hassin Bin Sober Jul 2017 #105

She sponsored a bill to freeze assets before trial. Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #138

Well we are going to have to get used to it because lots of folks are going to pick apart any Dem grantcart Jul 2017 #108

Sometimes the judicial review is the same agency that seized the asset. Hassin Bin Sober Jul 2017 #119

Yesterday I was at the Port of Calexico and the driver of a grantcart Jul 2017 #124

No. Many are done in states and cities question everything Jul 2017 #120

where is the data? grantcart Jul 2017 #123

You understand that all you GaryCnf Jul 2017 #125

What you discuss has nothing to do with Sen Harris...she sponsored a bill to freeze assets...Also Demsrule86 Jul 2017 #137

Talk of her as presidential candidate treestar Jul 2017 #142

Depends on how the law was applied in California DFW Jul 2017 #112

Make sure this doesn't become another 2012-2016 style preemptive attack against viable dem. nominees ecstatic Jul 2017 #118

I think that it will be good for her to know that this is an issue question everything Jul 2017 #121

I think that's a fair concern GaryCnf Jul 2017 #133

Op-ed in TWSJ.: Law-enforcement agencies seize billions a year without filing charges mahatmakanejeeves Jul 2017 #126

She's light-years better than any Republican. dawg Jul 2017 #150

Please make it stop GaryCnf Jul 2017 #153

Personally, I want to see leaders from the west coast like Harris take control of the party. Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #158

That's actually a great example GaryCnf Jul 2017 #162

I've followed Senator Harris for many years, since her time in SF. Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #163

A belated thank you for a measured approach question everything Aug 2017 #168

Tx GaryCnf Aug 2017 #169

Did you dig into her reasons for opposing the 2011 law or sponsorship of the 2015 bill? George II Jul 2017 #159

Harris, coming from the West Coast, has a clue about the drug war and cannabis legalization Warren DeMontague Jul 2017 #160

Well said. nt SunSeeker Jul 2017 #166

The 2015 Harris bill was about freezing assets, not forfeiture, and only when charges were likely. SunSeeker Jul 2017 #167