The facts don't quite support the narrative.
What’s next? You gonna try to sell us the Brooklyn Bridge?
The point isn’t that the elderly woman couldn’t have received more money for the “sale” of her property if she just took Trump’s initial offer. The point is that she didn’t want to sell, and she has every right to not sell if she doesn’t want to sell. At least she should have that right unless a justifiable “public use” reason is present. You know, like building a highway or some such that will be for public use AND held by the local government, not eventually owned by another private entity.
That’s a perversion of the “eminent domain” clause and everyone here knows that (or should). It’s a perversion of it, to take from one private owner and give to another private owner. That’s theft at the force of government. It’s what happened in the Kelo decision. And speaking of Kelo: (from the same article)
“Trump has attempted to use the same tactics in Connecticut and has championed the reviled Kelo vs. City of New London Supreme Court ruling upholding expansive use of eminent domain. He told Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto that he agreed with the ruling “100 percent” and defended the chilling power of government to kick people out of their homes and businesses based on arbitrary determinations:
“The fact is, if you have a person living in an area that’s not even necessarily a good area, and government, whether it’s local or whatever, government wants to build a tremendous economic development, where a lot of people are going to be put to work and make (an) area that’s not good into a good area, and move the person that’s living there into a better place — now, I know it might not be their choice — but move the person to a better place and yet create thousands upon thousands of jobs and beautification and lots of other things, I think it happens to be good.”
Like most statist promises of bountiful job creation, government-engineered redevelopment math rarely adds up. Trump’s corporations have backed casino industry bailouts and wealth-redistributing “tax-increment financing” schemes — the very kind of taxpayer-subsidized interventions we’ve seen on a grand scale under the Obama administration.
“Championing liberty begins at the local level. There is nothing more fundamental than the principle that a man’s home is his castle. Donald Trump’s career-long willingness to trample this right tells you everything you need to know about his bogus tea party sideshow.”
I’m sorry but I think it’s time for everyone here (at least on FR) to put the blinders away and dump Trump. If we are going to even hope to try to claim intellectual honesty here. Until and unless he can explain away this, without sidestepping antics that is.
“The facts don’t quite support the narrative.”
This fact overrides it all: Trump wanted the property and made the offer, but Ms. Coking didn’t want to sell. So Trump dragged her into court over it. And he’s a “100%” supporter of the Kelo decision, whether people are ambiguous about it or not. Property rights are fundamental in this country, and Trump has shown he doesn’t honor those rights.