Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Of course they're involved on the land owners part but that has nothing to do with the rights of the country to keep itself safe. If ever there was a time for eminent domain, this is it. Not a highway, not a railway, not a mall. American safety.You can't inject "feelings" into the equation when our national security is the topicI've posted links about this before. What he's doing is just plain wrong but he also said he wants to change the constitution so its easier for hm to steal land. He wants to make sure that what happened in Scotland does not happen here.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/25/world/europe/donald-trump-scotland-wall.html
Some of the families he is stealing land from have owned it for generations. He doesn't care. He also doesn't care that his wall is needless, won't work, will cost the middle class while enriching the 1%.
And damn RWNJs don't want to know how corrupt trumpery really is.
Yeah, some these lands have been in families for several generations. To forcibly seize them, is just wrong. I can't support that.
WTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?
What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?
Nah, i think feelings are a part of it. What if it was your property?
They've already built 700 miles of barriers,they'll get the rest done.
It'll stall, unless Trump goes with other options in the areas where Citizens don't wanna give up their lands. It's gonna get tied up in the courts for many years. He could be long gone before a Wall is ever completed.
The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.
like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?
That wasn't a case eminent domain.
and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..
In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.
With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] 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.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.
an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,
Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.They've already built 700 miles of barriers,they'll get the rest done.
It'll stall, unless Trump goes with other options in the areas where Citizens don't wanna give up their lands. It's gonna get tied up in the courts for many years. He could be long gone before a Wall is ever completed.
The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.
like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?
That wasn't a case eminent domain.
and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..
In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.
With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] 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.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.
an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,
I've posted links about this before. What he's doing is just plain wrong but he also said he wants to change the constitution so its easier for hm to steal land. He wants to make sure that what happened in Scotland does not happen here.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/25/world/europe/donald-trump-scotland-wall.html
Some of the families he is stealing land from have owned it for generations. He doesn't care. He also doesn't care that his wall is needless, won't work, will cost the middle class while enriching the 1%.
And damn RWNJs don't want to know how corrupt trumpery really is.
Yeah, some these lands have been in families for several generations. To forcibly seize them, is just wrong. I can't support that.
WTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?
What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?
I'd be more than happy to get paid and get rid of my problem with illegals constantly cutting my fences and trashing my property.
Looks like Trump is planning to seize Citizens' lands to get the Wall built. It's mainly gonna happen in Texas. But are Texans gonna just sit back and allow the Government to take their lands? I wouldn't bet on it. I'm a Trump supporter and fully support revamping and improving our Immigration System. Because i do feel the System is in ruins. It is time to move towards ending Illegal Immigration all-together.
But that being said, i can't support Eminent Domain. I can't support forcing Citizens to give up their lands for the Wall. There has to be other solutions for those areas. And honestly, I actually find Trump's beliefs on Eminent Domain to be pretty disturbing.
What are your thoughts?
I've posted links about this before. What he's doing is just plain wrong but he also said he wants to change the constitution so its easier for hm to steal land. He wants to make sure that what happened in Scotland does not happen here.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/25/world/europe/donald-trump-scotland-wall.html
Some of the families he is stealing land from have owned it for generations. He doesn't care. He also doesn't care that his wall is needless, won't work, will cost the middle class while enriching the 1%.
And damn RWNJs don't want to know how corrupt trumpery really is.
Yeah, some these lands have been in families for several generations. To forcibly seize them, is just wrong. I can't support that.
WTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?
What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?
I'd be more than happy to get paid and get rid of my problem with illegals constantly cutting my fences and trashing my property.
Yes, but that's you. It's not your lands.
Of course they're involved on the land owners part but that has nothing to do with the rights of the country to keep itself safe. If ever there was a time for eminent domain, this is it. Not a highway, not a railway, not a mall. American safety.You can't inject "feelings" into the equation when our national security is the topicYeah, some these lands have been in families for several generations. To forcibly seize them, is just wrong. I can't support that.
WTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?
What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?
Nah, i think feelings are a part of it. What if it was your property?
Bullshit story.Find one Texas rancher on the Mexican border who voted DEM.
These ranchers have already made deals with the Gov. to lease the land.
They are getting a lot more in lease fees than they get from grazing a few head of cattle on the narrow strips of land involved.
Everyone is happy with the deals except the mexican cartels and the DEM party who are watching tens of thousands of illegals, who they assumed are one day going to vote DEM now being kept out of the US.
Maybe the DEMs should be going back to the negro 'well' again.
Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.
Just build the wall on the other side of those complaining.
Trump's Wall may be crumbling before it's even begun being built. Texans don't just roll over to Government. They will fight.
As a Texan who's lived near the border,I can tell you with complete confidence that the vast majority want the wall or some kind of protection against the invaders.
They cut their fences releasing cattle,break into their houses and leave garbage everywhere.
I want better border security too. But is Government seizing Citizens' lands really the answer? I can't support that.
Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.It'll stall, unless Trump goes with other options in the areas where Citizens don't wanna give up their lands. It's gonna get tied up in the courts for many years. He could be long gone before a Wall is ever completed.
The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.
like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?
That wasn't a case eminent domain.
and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..
In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.
With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] 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.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.
an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,
Bullshit story.Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.
Just build the wall on the other side of those complaining.
Trump's Wall may be crumbling before it's even begun being built. Texans don't just roll over to Government. They will fight.
As a Texan who's lived near the border,I can tell you with complete confidence that the vast majority want the wall or some kind of protection against the invaders.
They cut their fences releasing cattle,break into their houses and leave garbage everywhere.
I want better border security too. But is Government seizing Citizens' lands really the answer? I can't support that.
Obama seized a shitload of land....so did Clinton and claimed it was national park property
This is just a fake news story.
Looks like Trump is planning to seize Citizens' lands to get the Wall built. It's mainly gonna happen in Texas. But are Texans gonna just sit back and allow the Government to take their lands? I wouldn't bet on it. I'm a Trump supporter and fully support revamping and improving our Immigration System. Because i do feel the System is in ruins. It is time to move towards ending Illegal Immigration all-together.
But that being said, i can't support Eminent Domain. I can't support forcing Citizens to give up their lands for the Wall. There has to be other solutions for those areas. And honestly, I actually find Trump's beliefs on Eminent Domain to be pretty disturbing.
What are your thoughts?
Building a Wall to protect our nation from invasion is a reasonable use of Eminent Domain.
Find one Texas rancher on the Mexican border who voted DEM.
These ranchers have already made deals with the Gov. to lease the land.
They are getting a lot more in lease fees than they get from grazing a few head of cattle on the narrow strips of land involved.
Everyone is happy with the deals except the mexican cartels and the DEM party who are watching tens of thousands of illegals, who they assumed are one day going to vote DEM now being kept out of the US.
Maybe the DEMs should be going back to the negro 'well' again.
Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.
Some probably won't have to move very far. A lot of that area is small-ish houses on a lot of land.
There's nothing wrong with imminent domain in this situation. Sure there will be a holdout here and there. They'll get money and move and that will be that.
Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.
like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?
That wasn't a case eminent domain.
and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..
In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.
With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] 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.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.
an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,
Do you watch Fox News? They just did a report on the issue. Some are gonna fight the Government on this. It's gonna be in the courts for years. If Trump goes this route, he'll never see a Wall.
I rarely watch any news channels with the exception of the BBC. Has Fox posted a link to the story? I would like to see it.Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.
like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?
That wasn't a case eminent domain.
and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..
In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.
With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] 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.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.
an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,
Do you watch Fox News? They just did a report on the issue. Some are gonna fight the Government on this. It's gonna be in the courts for years. If Trump goes this route, he'll never see a Wall.
Well you're essentially taking the position that it is unconstitutional under any circumstances if national security doesn't qualify.Of course they're involved on the land owners part but that has nothing to do with the rights of the country to keep itself safe. If ever there was a time for eminent domain, this is it. Not a highway, not a railway, not a mall. American safety.You can't inject "feelings" into the equation when our national security is the topicWTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?
What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?
Nah, i think feelings are a part of it. What if it was your property?
Well, we'll agree to disagree on this one. I think Trump would be wise to come up with other options in those areas. It's gonna be tied up in the courts for years. He'll never get his Wall. Seizing these lands by force isn't the answer. But that's just my feeling anyway.
The only story I saw was California telling private companies they'd better not build the wall.Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.
like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?
That wasn't a case eminent domain.
and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..
In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.
With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] 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.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.
an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,
Do you watch Fox News? They just did a report on the issue. Some are gonna fight the Government on this. It's gonna be in the courts for years. If Trump goes this route, he'll never see a Wall.
Find one Texas rancher on the Mexican border who voted DEM.
These ranchers have already made deals with the Gov. to lease the land.
They are getting a lot more in lease fees than they get from grazing a few head of cattle on the narrow strips of land involved.
Everyone is happy with the deals except the mexican cartels and the DEM party who are watching tens of thousands of illegals, who they assumed are one day going to vote DEM now being kept out of the US.
Maybe the DEMs should be going back to the negro 'well' again.
Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.
Some probably won't have to move very far. A lot of that area is small-ish houses on a lot of land.
There's nothing wrong with imminent domain in this situation. Sure there will be a holdout here and there. They'll get money and move and that will be that.
For the safety and security of the country, that's pretty much the ONLY time it's prescribed.
Dems don't get it. They never will.
Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?
That wasn't a case eminent domain.
and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..
In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.
With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] 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.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.
an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,
Do you watch Fox News? They just did a report on the issue. Some are gonna fight the Government on this. It's gonna be in the courts for years. If Trump goes this route, he'll never see a Wall.
As I said earlier the solution is simple.
You build the wall until you hit the holdouts property thus funneling all illegal traffic onto his property.
We'll see how long he holds out.
Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.It'll stall, unless Trump goes with other options in the areas where Citizens don't wanna give up their lands. It's gonna get tied up in the courts for many years. He could be long gone before a Wall is ever completed.
The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.
like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?
That wasn't a case eminent domain.
and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..
In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.
With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] 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.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.
an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,
I actually wasn't referring to you.Find one Texas rancher on the Mexican border who voted DEM.
These ranchers have already made deals with the Gov. to lease the land.
They are getting a lot more in lease fees than they get from grazing a few head of cattle on the narrow strips of land involved.
Everyone is happy with the deals except the mexican cartels and the DEM party who are watching tens of thousands of illegals, who they assumed are one day going to vote DEM now being kept out of the US.
Maybe the DEMs should be going back to the negro 'well' again.
Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.
Some probably won't have to move very far. A lot of that area is small-ish houses on a lot of land.
There's nothing wrong with imminent domain in this situation. Sure there will be a holdout here and there. They'll get money and move and that will be that.
For the safety and security of the country, that's pretty much the ONLY time it's prescribed.
Dems don't get it. They never will.
I'm not a Democrat.
"Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." - Benjamin Franklin
