Posted on 10/06/2015 6:02:31 PM PDT by sheikdetailfeather
The latest round of attacks aimed toward Donald Trump can only reasonably be considered divinely inspired fails.
OMG Donald Trump Supports Eminent Domain!!
[ *NOTE* Watch closely who picks up on this attack approach and you’ll identify an even larger number of the GOPe deceivers than were visible before. ]
Brett Baier interviewed Donald Trump for his Fox News Special Report segment and carried with him a specifically pre-framed angle of attack, an agenda. Baier used the Club for Growth argument (see video: @3:34) for conversation about Eminent Domain.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
All the while telling them that it was a better place and was for the greater good.
Then you are a fascist. No wonder you support Trump.
Mike, they don’t care about rights when its their guy infringing them. Same as the left.
Sorry,vyou left out the quotes. I thought you were saying you supported Kelo and then rationalizing it. My bad.
The establishment is getting the response it wants. This is a terrible thing, but I don’t see how it equates to open borders and common core the other guys want. Heck even Ted gave Iran the bomb
Good post.
I really don’t get too worked up over eminent domain. I’m not for it, but it hasn’t affected me yet and probably never will.
However, illegal immigration has affected me ever since I was born in Mexas then moved to Mexifornia. And recently escaped to move back to the US. I don’t want my new home ruined like the border states.
So should I not vote for the only candidate proposing a solution that will save our country from the invasion over a trivial issue? One that, ironically, will need to be used to build the wall ;) I’m ok with that because the alternative is to give our country away.
She lost the house.
But the private development that was to take place there has never happened.
It’s now an empty lot.
The rationale (irrationale?) of the Supreme Court was that even though this property was taken by a private entity, not a government, it was for the public good because the commercial property of the money-making developer who took it over would generate more tax revenue.
It won’t be long before they use it to take over all your property, using that logic. Why not take your car if a taxi company will pay more taxes using it than you would pay?
Stolen implies there was no fair payment made for the property. I bet in Trumps case the payment was more than fair.
YDK.
Just a question...who among the Republican candidates would do anything about the Kelo decision as President? What role does a President have in it, anyway?
Eminent domain has a legitimate constitutional use. Kelo stretched it, and that’s hardly unique when it comes to Supreme Court rulings. The states, by and large, have reacted to protect their citizens in the face of the judicial overreach of Kelo.
All the other candidates, with the possible exception of Cruz, are in the pockets of the COC and gig Wall Street donors, and would be very supportive of Kelo type actions.
Trump is wrong on this issue if he supports actions like the ones the Supremes affirmed in Kelo. I rather doubt it would be a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees named by a President Trump. If it is, well that’s a small price to pay to have Trump break the Uniparty lock on the White House.
Cruz voted for fast tracking trade authority, so the conservative option that’s currently polling low isn’t blemish free when it comes to supporting the constitution over expediency. If I reject Trump over Kelo, why should I not reject Cruz over his trade vote?
Bottom line, if the nominee isn’t Trump or Cruz Kelo will be among the least of many more serious threats liberty will face.
Trump is a weapon to murder the GOPe. Until that beast is slain, hammering Trump over Kelo is akin to a sheep rejecting the help of the sheepdog because it has fleas just like the wolf has.
I disagree with Trump on this, but it's not a problem that will end the country in a few more years. Immigration is, or would be with Rubio or Jeb or Shrillary.
“Eminent domain is in the constitution, but not for private profit via casinos.”
I agree, but the rationale was not for private profit, of course, but for tax receipts and jobs and civic improvement (looks). The area in question was basically a slum.
We are in complete agreement on all you say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.