Your video, The Matrix Resurrections Pitch Meeting, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

So The Blue Man Group meets Dark Side of the Moon meets Battlestar Galactica meets going to the well for the billionth time? Yay, I guess.

from Asset Forfeiture
Policy Manual 2021


I. Guidelines for Planning for Seizure and Restraint
A. Background
The Department of Justice (Department) Asset Forfeiture Program (Program) encompasses the
seizure and forfeiture of assets that represent the proceeds of, or were used to facilitate, federal
crimes. The Program has four primary goals:
(1) Punish and deter criminal activity by depriving criminals of property used in or acquired
through illegal activities.
(2) Promote and enhance cooperation among federal, state, local, tribal, and foreign law
enforcement agencies.
(3) Recover assets that may be used to compensate victims when authorized under federal law.
(4) Ensure that the Program is administered professionally, lawfully, and in a manner consistent
with sound public policy

II. Payment of Attorneys’ Fees in Criminal Forfeiture Cases
A. Defendant’s attorneys’ fees
The defendant in a criminal forfeiture action may file for an award of attorneys’ fees only under
the Hyde Amendment.4 A motion for fees and costs filed in a civil forfeiture case under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2465(b) cannot include fees and costs incurred in even a directly related criminal proceeding.5
To prevail on a Hyde Amendment claim, the defendant must prove that: (1) the defendant was the
prevailing party in the underlying action; (2) the government’s position was vexatious, frivolous, or in
bad faith; and (3) there are no special circumstances that would make the award unjust.6
This burden
is heavier than the one the government must meet under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA

Democrats are denied even a hearing for even their centrist picks (Garland) outrageously unconstitutionally, then Republicans pick FAR RIGHT politicos to replace moderate leftist judges. That was new, never before seen in our history.
Sotomayor and Karen are centrists, dumb shit. Kavenaugh and Barrett are extremist far right wingers….Barrett is barely even a judge, rushed in by a lame duck traitorous seditionist and his lackeys, directly contradicting their own excuse for not hearing Obama’s nomination. They actually admitted they rammed her through as fast as possible with the barest minimum of examination in order to pack the court in anticipation of them contesting the election results….admitted it before the election.
Kavenaugh and Barrett are both extremist Far right wingers, political activist judges, who lied in their confirmation, one is a multiple rapist, never investigated, the other a religious extremist with zero experience who said she would recuse herself on any issue of faith, but hasn’t recused herself from any.
Throw down the gauntlet?! Opposition to his nomination centered on his perceived willingness to roll back the civil rights rulings of the Warren and Burger courts, and his role in the Saturday Night Massacre during the Watergate scandal. On October 23, 1987, the Senate rejected Robert Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court by a roll call vote of 42—58. Bork's margin of rejection by the Senate remains, by percentage, the third-largest on record and broke a 142-year record for largest defeat of a Supreme Court nomination. A historic immediate bipartisan rejection because he was totally unsuited, and had undeniably tried to help Nixon cover up Watergate as acting AG by firing the special prosecutor at Nixon’s direction (the AG and deputy AG had quit when Nixon insisted)….*.
Absolutely nothing similar to Obama being denied a hearing for his picks for a year until his term ended….*. Holy shit! What stupidity.

There are far fewer “conservatives” today, the Republican Party is 26% of the population, not a majority.

Yes, they are throwing cases to the packed court as fast as possible before their stolen majority evaporates. I support a 15 justice Supreme Court with a constitutional amendment halting any further additions without a 2/3 majority….add 6 hyper liberals…no judicial experience necessary or even preferred…AOC would be great.

Why bring a case you might lose? Because cases are supposed to be heard on their merits, not based on political affiliation you ignorant cow. You think the Supreme Court should be a political wing of the right, choosing and deciding cases based on political affiliation, not the law, science, common sense, ethics, or precedent….but only when it serves you.

So, gun rights should be up to states? That’s the next step if you win that fight…the constitution dies and states decide everything….as civil war erupts. Great plan, so patriotic. Remember, California is big enough that when they require fingerprint scanners on all guns sold in the state, manufacturers will add them to all guns….when semi auto guns are banned, manufacturers will move to single shot guns….just like auto manufacturers changed their cars to meet our requirements. Is that your plan? Had you even considered what individual states being in control means? It means California becomes the leader of America, controlling the other states by means of our size, wealth, and international clout. Enjoy.

Not like this, it hasn’t. Never in American history has the court been politicized and weaponized against the will of the majority to ignore precedent (contrary to their oaths and confirmation statements) in order to overturn established law and constitutional rights as a political act. Never.

Clearly fails to meet the criteria for a citizens arrest….they had no personal knowledge he had committed a crime (and indeed he had not). They did not stop him immediately during the commission of a crime or immediately afterwards. The crime they suspected him of committing was not a felony, so they could not follow him or arrest him after the fact, the law requires immediate apprehension. The force used in a citizens arrest must be proportional to the crime, it wasn’t.

Because it wasn’t a legitimate citizens arrest, by stopping him and aiming guns at him they became the initial aggressors, and the instigator of violence cannot claim self defense when his victim defends themselves….by law.

But they’re white, at least one was in law enforcement, the victim is black, and it’s Georgia. Don’t get your hopes up even such a blatantly obvious cut and dry murder case will end with a fair outcome.

Ironically, the defense just asked again for a mistrial because black men are driving around the protests carrying rifles, and they say that’s an intimidation tactic meant to terrify the jury (while admitting the jury is unaware of them)…but when their clients did that and went on to use those guns, that was a civic duty, a community service they were performing. Um….

Yes, that is what I meant, as soon as he was approaching with an openly carried gun, wild west rules as I understand them say the moment he attempts to aim at anyone he is open game for anyone who can draw faster.

If you desperately want to live in the wild west that is.

I am totally lost on whether I should be using the sarcasm button on these posts. I am being sarcastic. I believe some form of gun limiting federal law is the only way out of this mess. But then the sarcasm does not make my claim invalid.

I knew an american who came to Prague (turns out he is still here and is still a film producer) who would carry his gun around all the time and randomly pull it out and show it to people at business meetings and in pubs. I thought at the time (early 90s) dude this is SO embarassing. Regular manners in a civilized society since roman times dictate that people do not carry weapons unless danger is imminent. You only carry weapons if you are directly employed to be in dangerous situations, otherwise you are putting yourself and others in danger and appear to be a reckless fool.

So if the USofA consider themselves the wild west to this day, then it is understandable that Kyle was let go, and I say disarm him or shoot him before he shoots you.

Hit him with that skateboard, only harder!

Just to be clear, when armed groups of BLM activists come to your town to protect black owned businesses from the bi-yearly neo Nazi / Klan meet up, follows a vitriolic racist they think they stopped from attacking a business by threatening them with death, and along the way threatens them a few more times, if the unarmed assumed klan member turns around and approaches the BLM activists in anger, it's fine to shoot the racist scumbag in the head, and that goes for any and all that try to stop them afterwards. Idiotic, but I'll send the message to the "gonna fuck shit up" wing (the left wing 3%) and get them moving to NC right away....fully armed and looking for trouble they can stop with a bullet. Better keep your mouth shut around town from now on or someone might feel threatened and have to defend themselves.

Funny, I recall last year you screamed that armed gangs of black thugs were coming to towns across America to shoot whomever they pleased....turned out it was white right wing thugs that did exactly that, repeatedly, so now you're fully in favor of it and prepared to defend them with gusto. Hmmmm. No, you aren't racist though.

This strikes close to home.
History in my town.

Not because I'm a Yankee but I've moved to Monroe NC back in 2001 for work.

I've read that this was a segregated town back in 61 when I was born.
This town was a Klan meet up for all surrounding areas .

This Document indicated an incident where 15,000 Klansman held a rally here.


This document shows some real fuckery form late 50's and 60's

Girl child, meet Mothman's brother, Mayfly Whisperer. Make sure to keep your doors & windows shut for days to come. He picked up your scent.

I wish we had this in the US:

1. At 18, you go into two years of national service, PERIOD. Unless you're in a coma, you're going. And you're going to go someplace you're not from and be on a team with people you're not used to so that your millimeter-wide view of America gets forced open to a mile.

You will be evaluated for mental and physical wellness. If you're suffering from mental illness, you will get help. If you're struggling with weight or other physical issues, you will get help.

You will be helping out in communities that you are not used to seeing: rural, inner-city, black, white, Latino. You will meet gay people, hard-core religious people, prisoners, entrepreneurs, carpenters and mechanics. You will get to know their world and help them understand yours.

2. After your two years, you have some choices:

- You can go into the military and strengthen those skills you've shown an aptitude for.

- If you want, you can attend a trade school, fully covered.

- If you want to go to college, your first two years will be covered if you get a AA/AS. Should you go for a four-year degree, your first three years will be covered.

Imagine what kind of nation we'd be living in right now has this been done in 1990.

Yes, he's making his point quite well.
He's pointing out all the ways they follow the law and rules of civilization, even though they're sometimes inconvenient or uncomfortable, even though many laws are to protect others more than themselves. He's doing it in a way that no one ignores. He's exemplifying the selfish, outrageous behavior they are championing in such a way that they can't help but disagree with him, which MAY lead to them questioning their own actions and recognising they resemble that display he put on.

When did he call them names?

Mask mandates are in place, put there by responsible representatives. This meeting was to explain why to those too obstinate to understand why, not to let them choose.
They have been told hundreds of times by calm reasonable people, calmly and using data and statistics to explain why masks and vaccines are necessary, and the answer was "keep yer govment vaxine urtta mah blud and yer Fouchi facemask off me and mah chilin!"

Only enforcing it when it's absolutely necessary, only where it's absolutely necessary, and for as short a time as possible has led us to wave 4, the worst yet. It's necessary now until the virus is gone, it's necessary everywhere so the virus doesn't have a Petri dish to evolve in and become far more virulent and dangerous, it's necessary to continue wearing them and getting vaccinated/boostered until the virus is eradicated....maybe until civilization falls if we're unlucky or too stupid to follow directions.

I have no idea why this touches such a nerve for you. It seems so obviously proper to most of us, and an excellent way to show them that they already do tons of annoying stuff for other people's safety, like driving the speed limit and stopping at lights and wearing clothes, not starting random fires, etc....all stuff mandated by the government.

Explain please, why that's improper.

Wait....so you say we shouldn't have a discussion at all with anti maskers/antivaxers, because they'll spout some nonsense?!
Um.....no.
You don't convince people to do the right thing by ignoring them when they do the wrong things for the wrong reasons. WTF are you saying?! Don't have any discussions because extremists will take hold and you think reasonable people can do nothing. Only true if reasonable people stop trying to discuss and convince them of reality, which is your suggestion? Um......

believe the idea is that all of us do or don't engage in things that we don't necessarily enjoy (or enjoy). either for legality or decency or the stir, it causes...

- breastfeeding
- pistol wearing in town
- hats at weddings/funerals/churches
- shutting off cells at the same and more
- wheels on busy sidewalks
- not heckling the priest's sermon ("YOU SUCK FATHER!")*

some of these are up to the person, some not as bad as others, but common sense SHOULD guide sane people.

'tho if COVID becomes a public health crisis (ala Black Death-esque) they'll find where their freedom meets real oppression (Thyphoid Mary on a large scale).

https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2020/youraba-april-2020/law-guides-legal-approach-to-pandemic/

personally, the idea that I could end up killing someone quickly replaced my health concerns. if found someone died because wasn't wearing a mask - would kill me.

so, in short, hope any/or all of these blunts find themselves in a situation where their car won't start. and no one will help them 'til them mask up.

"just need a part!"
"not until you observe our policy of public health! here's a mask...and if you'd put on shoes and a shirt..."

bet they'd do it for their f'n car. but for little bobby or old man Thorney?

...hope a camel w/a huge lip blister kisses them straight on the mouth.

reminds me of a song...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFRDimvVimw

testify.



* Bobcat gag