Here Come Da Judge


With America facing bankruptcy with a $17.8 trillion dollar debt , President elect Donald Trump faces a grave challenge. Balance the Books.

So what’s the plan, Stan? 

Well most of us would think taxes. But no! As a matter of fact here is what Trumps tax plan adds to the coffers.

Presidential candidate Donald Trump has proposed tax reforms that would significantly reduce marginal tax rates for both individuals and businesses, increase standard deduction amounts to nearly four times current levels, limit or repeal some tax expenditures,repeal the individual and corporate alternative minimum taxes and the estate and gift taxes,and tax the profits of foreign subsidiaries of US companies in the year they are earned. The Tax Policy Center estimates the proposal would reduce federal revenue by $9.5 trillion over its first decade and an additional $15.0 trillion over the subsequent 10 years. So that on’t help decrease existing debt.
Well that certainly doesn’t help!
Perhaps his new cabinet members have solutions. At the rate of climbing debt it would certainly be a joint effort on their part to come together with a number of plans. But remember, cutting spending does not reduce past debt.
There is one fellow who seems to have an answer.
Civil Forfietures
The Federal government has the power to seize property, be it bank accounts, real estate, personal items, what have you, without a judge ever getting involved. Billions of dollars, even trillions of dollars in assetts are up for grabs if the Federal or Local law enforcement official decide that a property owner has broken a law. Thats right, A LAW. Not just drug dealing as many of us think. The law is written to allow the Feds and local law enforcement to seize your assets if you or a family member have been charged with a crime.
Whats more, with the Feds Civil Forfeiture program, you don’t have to commit a crime. They can just take your assets! In civil forfeiture, it suffices that property is suspected of having been involved in a crime. Once seized, the property’s owners bear the burden of proving their property’s innocence.
Watch this video to get an idea of where i am going with this.
But this will require some major adjustments to help, so a strongman is needed to head up the charge.
Enter Jeff Sessions.
During an interview with George Wills, Sessions expressed his support of both criminal and civil forfeiture. He additionally eluded to the fact that this could be a central part of helping the country back on its feet. The all-too-common practice allows law enforcement to take private property without due process and has become a cash cow for state and local police and prosecutors.
Under a federal program called “equitable sharing,” local law enforcement can team up with federal authorities to seize property in exchange for 80% of the proceeds.

Assets are often seized—and never returned—without any judicial process or court supervision. Unlike criminal forfeiture, civil forfeiture doesn’t require a criminal conviction or even charges. According to the Virginia-based Institute for Justice, which tracks forfeitures, 13% of all forfeitures done by the Justice Department between 1997 and 2013 were in criminal cases while 87% were civil forfeitures. And 88% of those forfeitures were done by an administrative agency, not a court.

Civil-rights activists have campaigned for years to end forfeiture abuses. But in a 2015 hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Sessions defended the practice. He said he doesn’t “think it’s wrong to—for federal government to adopt state cases” and added that “taking and seizing and forfeiting, through a government judicial process, illegal gains from criminal enterprises is not wrong.”

Mr. Sessions said he was “very unhappy” with criticism of a program that mostly took money from people who have “done nothing in their lives but sell dope.” But his focus on the utility of criminal forfeitures overlooks the serious need for reform to end due-process abuse in civil forfeitures.

The AG nominee was once a prosecutor in Alabama, and that state is among the big offenders. According to a report by the Institute for Justice, between 2000 and 2013 Alabama took in more than $75 million in revenue through the equitable-sharing program. IJ ranks Alabama 31st in the nation for the amount of money it received in equitable-sharing payments from the Justice Department from 2011 to 2013. The top three, which take the least amount of money in equitable sharing, are South Dakota, North Dakota and Wyoming. Worst are Rhode Island, California and New York.

In 2015 then-Attorney General Eric Holder rolled back part of the equitable-sharing program known as “adoption” which allows state governments to get a piece of the federal forfeiture pie. But this was only a suspension, and the former status quo can be reinstated by another Attorney General.

The lack of procedural protection coupled with financial incentives has turned policing for profit into a slush fund for governments hungry for cash, and the payouts too often come at the expense of civil liberties.


The Sourovelises’ son, who lived at home, was arrested for selling a small amount of drugs away from home. Soon there was a knock on their door by police who said, “We’re here to take your house” and “You’re going to be living on the street” and “We do this every day.” The Sourovelises’ doors were locked with screws, and their utilities were cut off. They had paid off the mortgage on their $350,000 home, making it a tempting target for policing for profit.

Nationwide, proceeds from sales of seized property (homes, cars, etc.) go to the seizers. And under a federal program, state and local law enforcement can partner with federal authorities in forfeiture and reap up to 80 percent of the proceeds. This is called — more Orwellian newspeak — “equitable sharing.”

No crime had been committed in the Sourovelises’ house, but the title of the case against them was Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. 12011 Ferndale St. Somehow, a crime had been committed by the house. In civil forfeiture, it suffices that property is suspected of having been involved in a crime. Once seized, the property’s owners bear the burden of proving their property’s innocence. “Sentence first — verdict afterwards,” says the queen in “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.”

As USAG, Sessions will have the ability to upgrade and adjust the Civil Forfieture and equitable sharing programs. Perhaps dropping to a 60/40 split in favor of his Justice department.

Remember, no crime needs be committed, however how many of you lie on your tax return, or smudge a bit on your income for a loan from the bank (FDIC INSURED), or even travel with cash in your pocket! And how about those offshore accounts that the feds have forced the offshore banks to report.

BEWARE, Cause here comes da Judge!