Skip to comments.Trump Spokesperson Says Ted Cruz Eminent Domain Attack Ad â€˜Outright Liesâ€™
Posted on 01/24/2016 12:44:34 PM PST by dynoman
"The ad is very misleading. In fact, it outright lies about a widow's home being bulldozed," Pierson tells Breitbart News in an exclusive interview. "When you look at the facts, there is a process in place for eminent domain which was followed in this instance. Ms. Coking ended up keeping her property for years, because Mr. Trump didn't purchase it, and it ended up saving him a fortune," Pierson adds. In 2014, 16 years after the court battle ended and several years after Coking moved to California, her grandson sold the house at auction for $530,000, far less than Trump was willing to pay her in the 1990s. In 2014, 16 years after the court battle ended and several years after Coking moved to California, her grandson sold the house at auction for $530,000, far less than Trump was willing to pay her in the 1990s.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
"This is actually a pretty good ad exposing how Trump has used eminent domain to bulldoze an elderly woman's home to create a limo parking lot for his casino:"
That is an outright lie.
Read and see the unbelievable contortions some go though to avoid admitting the statement is a lie;
The actual summation statement in the thread, at the ad site, and in Ted’s tweet;
“This is actually a pretty good ad exposing how Trump has used eminent domain to bulldoze an elderly woman’s home to create a limo parking lot for his casino:”
That is an outright lie.
Cruz is using lies now...he is desperate.
Trump on the Cruz ad yesterday in Pella IA;
What a mess this guy is.
Yep the house wasn’t bull dozed.
Wow, they must really be worried about this one sticking. Truth hurts, though - semantics won’t save him on this one.
“I am Glenn Beck’s friend, and I approved this message”
"Ad exposing how Trump has used eminent domain to bulldoze an elderly woman's home to create a limo parking lot" ; Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) January 22, 2016
Ad is a lie - Trump never bull dozed it, never bought it.
Years later It was bull dozed... in 2014 after it was sold in an auction.
The buyer was Carl Ichan...
Cruz uses fake information in an ad to attack Trump.
No wonder these two are bosom buddies
The ad does not say the home was “bulldozed”. Anybody that’s says it did is lying.
And a copy of Trump’s offer is where?
Trump’s word alone is not enough. If he said he would have paid $5 million, I bet she would have taken it. Trump probably wanted it for a fraction of the value. No other reason he tried to use eminent domain to get it.
Did you not read Ted’s tweet?
Without eminent domain, no large metropolitan airports would have been possible, our magnificent Interstate Highway system would be impossible, most large hospitals and schools would not be here, not to mention huge financial centers in New York, Chicago & Los Angeles.
Keystone pipeline, a private enterprise, would require confiscation of thousands of farms and homes. Eminent domain is a prosperity creator.
Some people do not place prosperity high on their agenda, both on far left and far right.
Great ad. The truth hurts.
Can you read at all? I didn’t mention Teds tweet.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Vera Coking is a retired homeowner in Atlantic City, New Jersey whose home was the focus of a prominent eminent domain case involving Donald Trump.
In 1961, Coking and her husband bought the property at 127 South Columbia Place as a summertime retreat for $20,000.
In the 1970s, Penthouse magazine publisher Bob Guccione offered Coking $1 million for her property in order to build the Penthouse Boardwalk Hotel and Casino. She declined the offer, and Guccione started construction of the hotel-casino in 1978 around the Coking house, but ran out of money in 1980 and construction stopped. The steel framework structure was finally torn down in 1993.
In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines. Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for about 35 years, refused to sell. When Coking refused to sell to Trump, the city of Atlantic City condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. Her designated compensation was to be $251,000, about one quarter of what Guccione had offered her 10 years earlier.
With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities, and eventually prevailed. Superior Court Judge Richard Williams ruled that, because there were “no limits” on what Trump could do with the property, the plan to take Coking’s property did not meet the test of law. But Williams’ ruling did not reject the practice of using eminent domain to take private property from one individual and transferring it to another, which would eventually be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kelo v. City of New London.
Two other properties that prevailed against eminent domain eventually did sell: Sabatini’s restaurant received $2.1 million and a pawnshop sold for $1.6 million. Their lots became part of a large lawn flanking a taxi stand for Trump’s casino. Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her grandson, Ed Casey.
Casey subsequently tried to sell the house, putting it on the market in 2011 with an initial asking price of $5 million. By September 2013 the price had reduced to $1 million, but it still did not sell as Atlantic City continued to suffer the lingering effects of the financial crisis of 2007-08 and over-building during the boom that preceded it.
The property was finally sold for $530,000 in an auction on July 31, 2014. Neither the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority nor the owners of Trump Plaza expressed any interest in the auction. The buyer was Carl Icahn, who held the debt on Trump Entertainment, owner of Trump Plaza. He subsequently demolished the house.
The adjacent Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino, the property for which Trump wanted Coking’s property to begin with, closed on September 16, 2014 due to lack of business.
Trumpistas just don’t get it. Anybody with any knowledge of real estate law knows there are six rights of property ownership - to sell, to lease, to use, to give away, to enter and exit, and (most importantly here) the right to refuse all of them. Mrs. Coking exercised this right. Trump, not liking her answer, sought then to use government’s authority to deny her of those rights. It is disgusting, unamerican, and he’s right to be defensive about it - it’s that abhorrent.
Think about it - Mrs. Coking was stubborn, and won in the end; how much did it cost her to defend her rights, though? What would’ve happened to her if she couldn’t afford it?
The fact that Donny is still proud of this charade should tell everybody what a disgusting prick he really is.
I have used Rogaine to grow hair on my head.
....................It didn't work.
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.