search results matching tag: seizure

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (97)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (5)     Comments (347)   

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Aaaaawwww….look…another failed prediction.

Poor criminal fraud, charity thief, and rapist Don is derailing because he failed to remove DA Willis and couldn’t derail, move, or even delay the case.
No impropriety, no conflict of interest, no inappropriate enrichment, therefore no disqualification and no removal.
😂
10 days until the next criminal trial…10 days until $467 million (and rising) due to NY or seizure begins. Bad times for Don.
The campaign is struggling after Don accidentally admitted he will cut social security and Medicare/medicaid (and raise the retirement age) if elected.

Hilarious, the new RNC co-chair said on live tv twice that everyone is better off today than 4 years ago…making the case for a second Biden term clearly.

Bonus - Child rapist Gaetz has been subpoenaed by his 17 year old sex trafficked “girlfriend” in a defamation case. 😂

$2.3 billion in aid from Denmark including F-16s for Ukraine who has routed Russia in the last week. Sorry comrade.

bobknight33 said:

Poor fraudulent GA voter fraud case- is derailing.. All because the DA is banging the hired help and lied about it. This could taint the whole county office and might need to be moved to another county---- OR dismissed ..
Either way big loss for the left and big win for Trump.


bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

PRESIDENT EPSTEIN HAS ADMITTED TO THE COURTS HE DOESN’T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY THE JUDGMENTS AND MUST SELL PROPERTIES FIRST. HE HAS SAID HE CAN ONLY PAY $100 MILLION.

This means 1) no appeals 2) SURPRISE! Trump lied about his assets and 3) the enforcement of the judgements can be enforced now because he just conceded he cannot pay the judgement or put up a bond, so seizure can begin now unless he gets an emergency stay….which was just DENIED…as was his offer to put up just $100 million.

I encourage his creditors to do whatever the hell they want with his money and since he won’t pay the state the state won’t come to help. 😂

He is barred from getting a loan against any NY holdings.
Hide and wait, wanna bet his stake in his properties isn’t as great as he’s claimed, maybe some with no ownership percentage at all just his name on the door (Trump Tower for instance, which is actually owned by GE and the condo owners and except for the lobby bathrooms, kitchen, and parking lot is just managed by the Trump org.).

So much for being a billionaire or great negotiator. He negotiated a $5 million debt into an $88 million and growing debt…good job! Now he owes near $540 million in judgements + nearly $140000 a DAY in interest between just the NY verdicts, money he doesn’t have. He’s the best ever at being the worst ever. 😂

As a bonus- total failure McConnel is quitting. Another red seat up for grabs with Republicans being historically unpopular after voting to keep open borders and broken immigration systems and once again perching on the brink of closing the government because they cannot govern.
Edit- my mistake, he’s only retiring as the head of the senate, not as a senator.
PS- https://videosift.com/video/Bobo-8482-s-Son-Arrested-On-22-Criminal-Charges

Agents Discover Gold And 1/2 Million In Senator’s Home

newtboy says...

He has claimed he can prove all the cash came from 30 years of savings out of his personal salary that he kept in cash because he feared seizure and confiscation like his family has suffered in Cuba.
Time will tell, but if true, the charges will fall flat.
Trump and family cannot say the same about any of the dozens of bribery charges with payments totaling near $3 billion from hostile foreign governments while they were negotiating with Trump…pure bribery.

Again, here’s the case the Republican Supreme Court decided in favor of protecting a Republican governor and to make it harder to prosecute bribery cases (which benefited Trump directly) and got Menendez’s previous case dismissed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_v._United_States
“ The ruling narrowed the legal definition of public corruption and made it harder for prosecutors to prove that a political official engaged in bribery.”

The Obama administration indicted him, Trump administration dropped the charges and Trump personally had a “private” congratulatory phone call telling Menendez how proud he was of him for getting off on the bribery charges and saying how his bribery charges were totally unfair to begin with…but in fact he was talking to stuttering John from the Howard Stern show on air. 😂

bobknight33 said:

Local business men just giving Menendez gold and cash -- why just because then like him? How naive.


Thanks to Republicans rewriting the rules on bribery to protect the Trumps - Quit getting you news from school teachers.. They are brainwashed leftest.

Katie Porter Proves Borders Are More Secure

newtboy says...

Look at the chart.
Smuggling didn’t double the day Biden’s policies went into place, seizures did. That means way more came in under Trump’s lax enforcement, and more deaths resulted from the tons he (his policies to ignore ports where most came in and focus only on the southern border where a fraction came through) did not seize.

Your suppositions ALWAYS turn out to be wrong, unsurprisingly since they are based on lies and a complete lack of understanding. You might want to stop making guesses, they never work out for you.

bobknight33 said:

Sleepy Joe is catching more but probably even more is coming in due to Joes lax enforcement. More deaths I suppose is going on under Joe.

San Mateo Sheriff Raids Batmobile Garage In Indiana

newtboy says...

Can anyone explain how a Ca sheriff got a Ca judge to write a seizure warrant for an out of state business over a purely civil matter, or why all 4 officers had any authority whatsoever that far out of their single county jurisdiction?

Beto interrupts dog and pony show

newtboy says...

Why must every word you write be an intentional bold faced lie?

Bob…can you list the three branches of government ?

Democrats control 1 branch, Republicans (including Senema and Manchin) control the other 2 (one outright, one by overused veto power and filibuster) and they block any Democratic legislation out of spite whether or not it’s good for the country, just to deny Democrats any “wins”. It takes a >60/40 majority for Democrats to get anything passed because Republicans do not want anything to be bipartisan…voting WITH democrats is a career ender, no matter what the bill is.

Democrats have tried dozens of times to make improvements, like background checks for EVERY gun sale, clip size limits, red flag laws, trying to raise the purchase age to 21, temporary seizure if someone gets a restraining order against you, and much more….Republicans blocked every single effort because they need NRA money and support.

Republicans made it legal for any criminal or nut job to not only buy as many guns and ammunition as they wish, but also to concealed carry them anywhere except where Republicans gather (like the NRA convention, once again held days after a mass shooting, or the capitol building).

They voted against giving babies formula, they voted against working to release political prisoners, they voted against supporting Ukraine, they voted against removing gun registration loopholes, mental health gun laws, clip size limits, etc., they voted against investigating Jan 6, Republicans are so anti Democrat they went full anti democracy.

Here’s your negative attention, since I know that’s what you really want. I’ll keep it light in honor of your father, unless you don’t, and just say you are a total liar. I would say consummate liar, but you’re really just awful at it and just make yourself look so incredibly stupid and dishonest at every opportunity.

You’ve never changed a single mind with your nonsensical lies.

bobknight33 said:

Democrats control all 3 branches. What improvement have they made to curb this issue?

Let's talk about altering the Supreme Court....

newtboy says...

The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” The Fifth Amendment in its Self-Incrimination Clause enables the citizen to create a zone of privacy which government may not force him to surrender. The 14th amendment “due process clause” has been interpreted to also affirm a right to privacy.

https://www.aclu.org/other/students-your-right-privacy

Sure sounds like rights to privacy are right there in the bill of rights though, an addendum to the constitution, as explained in numerous Supreme Court rulings.

<SIGH>. I thought you said “Pedantry is tiresome. Tell your friends.” Maybe take your own advice?

Some light reading…. In January 1973, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision in McCorvey's favor ruling that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides a "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant woman's right to choose whether to have an abortion. It also ruled that this right is not absolute and must be balanced against governments' interests in protecting women's health and prenatal life.[4][5] The Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the three trimesters of pregnancy: during the first trimester, governments could not prohibit abortions at all; during the second trimester, governments could require reasonable health regulations; during the third trimester, abortions could be prohibited entirely so long as the laws contained exceptions for cases when they were necessary to save the life or health of the mother.[5] The Court classified the right to choose to have an abortion as "fundamental", which required courts to evaluate challenged abortion laws under the "strict scrutiny" standard, the highest level of judicial review in the United States.

dogboy49 said:

To me, the current crop of justices seem to be less willing to deviate from the Constitution as written. Should abortion be allowed? IMO, yes. BUT, are laws banning abortion unconstitutional? According to the Constitution as written and amended, probably not. Roe v Wade was written by a court that believed that abortion and the "right to privacy" should carry the weight of constitutional law, even though the Constitution is silent on these "rights".

My suggestion: If abortion should be considered to be a "right", then so amend the Constitution. Otherwise, it will be subject to the vagaries of "interpretation" forever.

Stealing Homes

newtboy says...

If this wasn’t Stossel, I might upvote, but because it is him, I’m feeling relatively certain that his eventual conclusion is faulty and many facts are just wrong. Remember, he’s the person who sued Facebook when he claimed the 2020 forest fires were primarily caused by forest mismanagement not climate change and Facebook labeled it “Missing Context. Independent fact-checkers say this information could mislead people.”

It’s a near certainty that salient facts are being hidden to make it seem local government is stealing houses over $8 bills. That is how Stossel “reports”. For instance, any loans, mortgages, judgements, fines, outstanding bills in collections, overdue taxes, the cost of seizure, the cost of the sale, the cost to bring the home into sellable condition, etc are all paid from the proceeds before the “owner” would have any claims….and the government gets to estimate the value at seizure and set the starting auction bid accordingly.

The IRS seizes homes around 300 times per year, most are worth less than the debt owed.

Asset forfeiture is wrong. It’s legalized theft. I wish I could trust the source enough to support this video.

Jordan Klepper Takes On Canadian Truckers | The Daily Show

newtboy says...

I read it, nowhere did it give an estimate of what those protests cost, and it indicated there were multiple other routes for the oil to travel so didn’t even disrupt oil transportation completely, much less ALL commerce.
And it was about pipelines crossing their (or protected) land it seems, a far cry from the truckers. Yes, the validity and severity of your cause matters, just like the damage you do and to whom.

Billions worth of goods stuck temporarily…but no actual estimated cost for their delay, this cost billions in lost production and salaries that won’t be recovered.

That protest was targeted against the offending entity, not the populace. I have no issue with natives blockading their own land and preserves that feed those reservations against permanent destruction for some private profits. That’s a far cry from the truckers blockading the main border crossing for industry and tourism because they’re afraid to get a poke.

The numbers I saw were special. Hundreds of millions-billions lost (your billions in goods delayed doesn’t have a price tag). That was before the bridge was reopened. These protesters weren’t satisfied with that damage and continued to close your capitol with ever shifting demands. Since regular measures had failed, I support emergency measures, seizure, even forfeiture after trial, of any funds or tools used.

Perhaps they became only as localized (but certainly not as targeted, and localized in a city not the unpopulated country), but they had already done exponentially more damage and showed no sign of end or even demands.

Let’s ignore someone personally supporting a grass roots movement outside their country and control, please. I find it a red herring totally unconnected to how he governs.

Yes, some Floyd protests were more violent than the truckers, some weren’t, remember how they were all violently smashed, tear gassed, rubber bullets galore, run through with police trucks, unmarked vans pulling up and grabbing people crossing the streets, unmarked vans driving through towns full of police shooting tear gas at any moving body, etc? Don’t pretend the response is similar.
Also, the Floyd protests lasted a weekend in most cases (occupy Portland really wasn’t about Floyd) and went elsewhere the next march. They weren’t closing down one area for weeks intent on staying. Most lasted hours and were peaceful until police became violent, despite right wing media’s fear-mongering.

I think you’re stretching, putting on blinders, and doing insane mental gymnastics to pretend you believe that. From the actual damage caused, the idiotic reasoning behind it (quickly abandoned), the extremely uncanadianness of the self centered far right rally masquerading as protest, the international damage, the foreign involvement from planning to funding, these are unique “protests” in numerous ways.

Their idiotic beliefs are only one of many distinctions I’ve pointed out, and as I mentioned only color public opinion and the amount of patience they’re given by the public, not how the government treats them. It’s not at all honest for you to pretend that’s the entirety of my position…it’s very Bob of you, and has lost some of my respect.

Pipelines crossing sovereign territory or preserves = bad so blockading those areas to force pipeline movement = good….oil companies didn’t truck the oil out, they increased shipments from other areas by rail. Read the article you linked.

Native cultures and governments are different. Pretending an elected board for a reservation works for the people is naive in the extreme. Read about politics on reservations, who funds the people that get elected in most cases, what happens to opposing candidates…saying the board signed off while so many showed up to fight against it seems a bit at odds, no? Like maybe the board members were bribed, had ties with the oil industry, or other conflicts….just maybe?

And again, those protests didn’t cost a fraction what the truckers did from my research. Delaying delivery of a billion in goods isn’t the same as costing a billion in losses. Neither is delaying or cancelling a billion dollar project. Be adult please….don’t make such specious arguments ….please. They don’t slip by, and they make me think you are being disingenuous.

Jordan Klepper Takes On Canadian Truckers | The Daily Show

newtboy says...

90%? You underestimate by 9.99% IMO.

I’ve seen assaults. I’ve seen disturbing the peace in residential neighborhoods 24/7 for weeks on end. I’ve seen what amounts to kidnapping (trapping people in their cars on the street and blockading them in).
BTW, we aren’t India, more money was lost at this one crossing than if you blockaded all of India for the same timeframe. In America, we don’t just let other people block our borders….that’s our thing!

No, the bridge was not part of a recent past long term blockade, no farmer blockade shut down auto manufacturing on both sides of the borders or weeks. You are incorrect.

Protests are acceptable, even if they cause inconvenience. Protests without an issue that last for weeks-months with the only intent being causing economic damage aren’t protests, they’re tantrums. These protesters didn’t know why they were there besides getting the liberal out of power through any means.

These “protesters” deserved nothing but ridicule, their anti vax position is ridiculous, they know it, and it’s moot because the mandates change with the severity of the outbreak, and are from both sides of the border….Trudeau can’t force America to drop our mandates, and border crossers must be vaccinated….period. Notice when the mandates being lifted soon was announced they didn’t leave but just changed their demands. It’s not a protest, it’s an economic blackmail attempt.

The problem there is most of the violence was not part of the BLM protests (despite the lies right wing media produced all 2020), they were often nearby, taking advantage of the lowered police presence outside the protests, and often was violence directed at BLM, not coming from them. The people terrorizing and inciting violence, shooting crowds, planting bombs, lighting fires, shooting police, etc were Proud boys and Boogaloo boys…far right anti protesters. The idiots carried their manifestos explaining the false flag operation when they committed their crimes, and were caught repeatedly.

They should have simply used tow trucks, confiscating every truck involved to be sold at auction to pay for some of the exorbitant costs, far more than all summer of BLM and anti BLM protests, btw.

This was a threat to your sovereignty, and wasn’t being addressed by other laws or means (sounded like the police chief was a fan).

Seizure is perfection, but should include oversight (I bet it really does, you aren’t America where we’ve made it legal for police to commit armed robbery with no oversight). Note- seizure is different from forfeiture. They’re likely freezing accounts, not seizing the funds, right? Details matter.

It’s not just what they’re protesting, they don’t even know that themselves, it’s how and where. That said, the total lack of support among the population counts. I would expect any protest protesting against it being illegal to eat live babies to get shut down fast, no matter how civil they were on the streets.

Lemme guess, a pipeline crossing sovereign native lands under protest? Going over aquifers? Through preserves? Pumping tar sands no one really wants?
Millions in damages are an hour of the truck protests. They’re designed to cost tens of millions per day…costing everyone not just the target of their protest.

No known connection to protesters, but you want there to be one and are upset they didn’t just fabricate one? It sounds incredibly likely they’re involved, but without evidence one shouldn’t assign culpability.

They have the right to say anything, they don’t have the right to silence all other discussion and action while they ramble and party for weeks-months because they have nothing to say, but are loving the disruption they’re causing. A strong democracy doesn’t support one tiny group negating the entire continent’s voice for months. That’s what this is, they said their peace by day 2, now it’s not a protest, it’s an economic attack trying to blackmail a country (nearly a continent) into abandoning public health for a TINY minority of morons who want special privileges.

bcglorf said:

@newtboy,

Finally we're talking about my Canada .

I'm agreed with calling 90% of what the convoy and truckers are protesting as being misguided, ill informed or flat out wrong. That however shouldn't be what the right to protest is based upon.

The extent of the protestors illegal activity seems to have been blocking of roadways and borders. Which in Canada isn't exactly new:
-Blockading of roads to logging work sites to "protect old growth forest"
-Blockading of roads pipeline construction sites
-Blockading of transportation highways and railroads

In the past 2 years alone, those various sites have seen blockades ranging from weeks to months. In virtually every single one of those instances the Liberal government went out to meet and negotiate with the protestors while allowing them to continue for weeks to months. In one of the biggest protests Trudeau himself went to meet with the groups in person. Trudeau has a video of himself praising the farmer convoy and blockades in India, declaring his government will always defend the right of groups to protest.(those groups blocked multiple border crossings)

This time though, Trudeau started out with insulting, ridiculing and belittling the protestors. Within the first day of the protests, politicians and our national news corp in CBC were demanding an immediate end to the protests.

The protests that have seen comparable zero violence to the protests in the US in support of Floyd(which I support), where condemned repeatedly by the CBC and Trudeau as terrorizing the populace and inciting violence. For reference, Trudeau remained steadfast in support of the Floyd protestors right to protest.

The federal government essentially tried insults and ridicule to try and end this protest though, and when that didn't work they invoked a national emergency measures act that requires both:
-A threat to Canada's sovereignty
-A threat that can not be addressed by any other laws or means

The government then proceeded to empower themselves to not merely arrest protestors, but to freeze/seize the bank accounts of anyone considered to be supporting the protest, with no court oversight required.

The difference in how protestors are treated based upon what it is they are protesting is alarming and should be a red flag for anyone and everyone.

For reference, while these protests were going on, a pipeline worksite in BC that has been continually shut down by protests for the last several years was attacked in the night by a mob wielding machetes and axes. The workers and security were chased off and millions in damages were done to the site afterwards. Trudeau didn't feel the need to even address the incident though because he was to busy villianizing the convoy. The CBC media buried the incident under local BC news, and downplayed it as an 'alleged' incident, despite RCMP having responded and even having had an officer injured in the incident. CBC also emphasized there wasn't any verified connection to the ongoing protests against the pipeline...

When you look at the narrative, despite my disagreeing with the vast majority of what the convoy is wanting to say, I am disgusted by the attempt to remove their right to say it and everyone wanting to support a strong democracy with the right protest should feel the same.

News Fails to Ask WHY Police Seized $100K From Traveler

bobknight33 says...

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

News Fails to Ask WHY Police Seized $100K From Traveler

newtboy says...

If you could just steal any cash you see from anyone with absolutely no repercussions ever, wouldn’t you?
Wouldn’t you start searching people for money you can take? You might even target a group of people you have a prejudice against to take their money and to make them afraid to ever carry money.
Asset seizure is proof positive that the police are nothing but a violent, aggressive criminal organization that uses deadly force to steal from and intimidate law abiding citizens. No crime or suspicion of crime is required, and they keep the money they seize (steal).
*quality example of police being criminal thieves by design. *promote

NYC's Anti-Vax Rally in 49 Seconds

newtboy says...

Lemme guess, you don't care about that when it comes to remdesvir, which is not FDA approved, costs in the neighborhood of 4000 times as much (with profit margins to match) and known side effects are worse including....
Back pain
chest tightness
chills
cough
dark-colored urine
difficulty swallowing
fast heartbeat
fever
flushing
headache
hives, itching
light-colored stools
nausea and vomiting
puffiness or swelling of the eyelids or around the eyes, face, lips, or tongue
stomach pain, continuing
trouble breathing
unusual tiredness or weakness
yellow eyes or skin
Seizures
skin rash

People have severe side effects often enough that you have to wait under observation for an hour after getting it to be sure you don't need medical help.
You can't sue them either, but I'm sure that also doesn't matter to you because Republicans told you to take it instead of an FDA approved vaccine (and just coincidentally they and their major donors all own shares in the manufacturer).

TangledThorns said:

Big pharma makes billions from the vaccine. Best part is they can't be sued if you die from the vaccine.

The Real Nitty-Gritty

Car Cuts Off Semi Truck

wtfcaniuse says...

The car driver indicated before having a seizure and changing lanes?

I find it easy for the car to be hidden from the truck driver in a blind spot. I find it impossible that the entirety of the truck was in the car's blind spot.

If a truck was to keep all vehicles out of their blind spots it would be almost impossible to drive.

BSR said:

Maybe not an idiot. The driver of the car could have been having a seizure.

https://videosift.com/video/Man-Suffers-Seizure-While-Driving (skip to 2:50)

I'm sure the truck driver thought the same thing and decided to teach the idiot a lesson at any cost.

As far as blind spot is concerned, the truck driver should have kept the car in view if there was a blind spot at all.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon