In my post published earlier this week, Recent TSA Molestation Video Proves Americans Have Become Authority Worshipping Slaves, I noted the following:
Yeah, it’s disgusting, inappropriate and anathema to a free people, but that’s the point. We aren’t a free people. We’ve become a bunch of authority-worshiping subjects toiling on a plantation dominated by multi-national companies who write our laws and manipulate our thoughts through corporate media. The worst part is we don’t do anything about it. We elect Trump and then puff our chests out yelling stupid slogans like MAGA, as molestations from the TSA get worse. Well done everyone.
I was pleased that the above paragraph connected with many people, but for those of you who think I was being hyperbolic, take a look at the following excerpts from a piece recently published at The Washington Post, Since 2007, the DEA Has Taken $3.2 Billion in Cash from People Not Charged with a Crime:
The Drug Enforcement Administration takes billions of dollars in cash from people who are never charged with criminal activity, according to a report issued today by the Justice Department’s Inspector General.
Since 2007, the report found, the DEA has seized more than $4 billion in cash from people suspected of involvement with the drug trade. But 81 percent of those seizures, totaling $3.2 billion, were conducted administratively, meaning no civil or criminal charges were brought against the owners of the cash and no judicial review of the seizures ever occurred.
Remember, the terrorists hate us for our freedom.
That total does not include the dollar value of other seized assets, like cars, homes, electronics and clothing.
These seizures are all legal under the controversial practice of civil asset forfeiture, which allows authorities to take cash, contraband and property from people suspected of crime. But the practice does not require authorities to obtain a criminal conviction, and it allows departments to keep seized cash and property for themselves unless individuals successfully challenge the forfeiture in court. Critics across the political spectrum say this creates a perverse profit motive, incentivizing police to seize goods not for the purpose of fighting crime, but for padding department budgets.
In the absence of this information, the report examined 100 DEA cash seizures that occurred “without a court-issued warrant and without the presence of narcotics, the latter of which would provide strong evidence of related criminal behavior.”
Fewer than half of those seizures were related to a new or ongoing criminal investigation, or led to an arrest or prosecution, the Inspector General found.
“When seizure and administrative forfeitures do not ultimately advance an investigation or prosecution,” the report concludes, “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 scope of asset forfeiture is staggering. Since 2007 the Department of Justice’s Asset Forfeiture Fund, which collects proceeds from seized cash and other property, has ballooned to $28 billion. In 2014 alone authorities seized $5 billion in cash and property from people — greater than the value of all documented losses to burglary that year.
Some of the encounters were based on tips from confidential sources working in the travel industry, a number of whom have received large sums of money in exchange for their cooperation. In one case, officers targeted an individual for questioning on a tip from a travel industry informant that the individual had paid for a plane ticket with a pre-paid debit card and cash.
Nope, no conflict of interest there. USA! USA!
Forfeiture cases are also legally complex and difficult for individuals to win. Forfeiture cases are brought against the property, rather than the individual, leading to Kafkaesque case titles like United States v. $8,850 in U.S. Currency and United States of America v. One Men’s Rolex Pearl Master Watch.
While criminal proceedings assume the defendant’s innocence, forfeiture proceedings start from the presumption of guilt. That means that individuals who fight forfeiture must prove their innocence in court.
Meanwhile, guess who’s a big fan of civil forfeiture? Yep, you guessed it, Mr. MAGA himself, Donald Trump.
Recall what we learned in the post, Trump’s Policies Are Authoritarian, Not Populist:
President Donald Trump said on Tuesday there was “no reason” to curb law enforcement agencies that seize cash, vehicles and other assets of people suspected of crimes, a practice that some lawmakers and activists have criticized for denying legal rights.
The issue of civil asset forfeiture, created to disrupt the activities of organized crime groups, arose when sheriffs from around the United States told Trump at a White House meeting that they were under pressure to ease the practice.
“I’d like to look into that,” Trump said. “There’s no reason for that.”
Makes sense. Eliminating due process and providing the feds with open season to steal possessions from American citizens without charge is clearly a populist position.
This is an issue that’s been very important to me for many years, and I’m absolutely disgusted by Trump for being a defender of something so anti-American and unconstitutional.
In case you missed them the first time around, here are a few prior posts on the topic:
Why You Should Never, Ever Drive Through Tenaha, Texas
Asset Forfeiture – How Cops Continue to Steal Americans’ Hard Earned Cash with Zero Repercussions
How the IRS Used Civil Asset Forfeiture to Ruin the Lives of Two Connecticut Bakers
The DEA Strikes Again – Agents Seize Man’s Life Savings Under Civil Asset Forfeiture Without Charges
If you enjoyed this post, and want to contribute to genuine, independent media, consider visiting our Support Page.
In Liberty,
Michael Krieger
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G
Follow me on Twitter.
Lighten up, Mike. They’re just keeping us safe.
The problem with this issue is that only a small amount of people have been affected so there is not much grassroots support for change (even if there are few supporters of this policy).
How is it possible that none of these cases has made it to the Supreme Court?
There have been a lot of cases that went to the Supreme Court. Every state has different laws. One legal strategy might be a class action suit to challenge the State law in a state that has poor standards/safeguards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States When I read the descriptions of the logic, I would argue that by making laws allowing civil asset forfeiture based on circumstantial evidence of “guilt” the States are depriving citizens of their due process. In effect, they are tasked with the proving that a State’s notion of proponderance based on circumstantial evidence was wrongheaded and thoughtless and should not apply to their circumstance rather than the criminal or even civil trial standard that they are probably not at fault given their circumstances.
It really is absolutely disgusting, what’s going on. Michael’s article about the TSA was potent and accurate. Many of us are left wondering, “what can I do?” We need a critical mass of people who refuses to pay taxes any more or put up with this kind of treatment…..
The program is complete, the land of “Idiocracy” successful. No time to think, head down for work, consume, repeat. The heart knows there is no solution from Washington even if your head still believes the lies. Maybe the inevitable collapse is our only hope for waking the sleeping zombies back to life. Baahhh, me sheep, herd animal, no thought out side this animal farm, leader tell me all is ok, I go back to head down, lights out, Baahhh!!!!
This is all completely legal if you understand the law. The problem is very few people take the time to understand it.
http://www.sedm.org (start here) is a great place to start exploring
The simplest way to explain it is that congress has the power to legislate for two different jurisdictions (the 50 states/DC+Federal territories) In the 50 states they are limited by the Constitution, but in Federal jurisdictions they have unlimited authority. Most Americans have been legally “presumed” to be under federal jusistiction for several reasons the site above goes into great detail about such as: social security number, licenses, and any “benefits” you receive form the government like disability/SS/Medicare etc.
Much like the way states must abide by Federal rules when they receive “benefits”/money/or the benefit/privilege of using a SS card which says on back is government property.
so, stay out of airports, speak only in wilderness areas or in code, avoid mind control gadgets, meditate, cultivate a trustworthy friend, plant potatoes
Personally, I don’t fly, and have not (yet) been harassed by the TSA. Since I am on the frugal side (poor) I am not very likely to run into asset stealing by the constabulary. And thirdly, your article was condescending, and not at all helpful.