Posted on 02/10/2015 12:30:49 PM PST by John Semmens
President Obamas nominee for Attorney General Loretta Lynch followed up her stunning defense a presidents right to summarily execute enemies of the state with fulsome praise for governments controversial practice of seizing the property and money of people before they are found guilty of a crime, calling it a wonderful tool.
It is difficult to prove someone guilty of a crime under our laws, Lynch pointed out. The evidence required is substantial. The beyond reasonable doubt standard is daunting. Under Civil Forfeiture, though, there is more leeway. Under this statute, the property or money is accused of illegal actions. Since property and money have no civil rights the governments chances of success are higher. The burden of proof is on the person trying to reclaim the assets. He must prove to the courts satisfaction that no crime was committed.
The fact that the majority of cash circulating in America has traces of cocaine on it makes proving that this money was not obtained illegally nearly impossible, Lynch bragged. The best thing about Civil Forfeiture is that it gives government access to sorely needed resources without having to get an appropriation through the legislature. This increases the amount of funds available for socially beneficial uses by transferring them out of the hands of selfish individuals and into the hands of those dedicated to the collective welfare of all. Its a win-win situation all around.
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news/semi-satire posts you can find them at...
http://theconservativecitizen.com/2015/02/08/semi-newssemi-satire-5/
Too close to truth again John.
Al Sharpton, please answer the white phone (is that racist?)
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.