General Discussion

Demsrule86

(71,542 posts)

145. We need to denounce our revolution and warn candidates if you are involved with this group

Reply to Expecting Rain (Reply #104)

Thu Jul 27, 2017, 06:38 AM

Jul 2017

no DNC funds for you. They are the same as Green spoilers.

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