quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterDrakk

And it wont. Posse Comitatus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A new study of border takings under the 2006 Secure Fence Act finds that many owners get inadequate compensation, and that the condemnation process is flawed in other ways.

Making America 'white' again, will cost money and piss off a lot of land owners. Yep, that Trump guy, he's just like me and you, out for the little guy helping all he can and cleaning out the swamp alright.

Just 'give' the govt. your land...or else. You don't want to read these lowlights. Plus, we aren't up to the wall yet, we're still looking to replace fence from 2006. Headache on top of headache and the general incompetence.

Homeland Security circumvented laws designed to help landowners receive fair compensation. The agency did not conduct formal appraisals of targeted parcels. Instead, it issued low-ball offers based on substandard estimates of property values.

Larger, wealthier property owners who could afford lawyers negotiated deals that, on average, tripled the opening bids from Homeland Security. Smaller and poorer landholders took whatever the government offered — or wrung out small increases in settlements. The government conceded publicly that landowners without lawyers might wind up shortchanged, but did little to protect their interests.

The Justice Department bungled hundreds of condemnation cases. The agency took property without knowing the identity of the actual owners. It condemned land without researching facts as basic as property lines. Landholders spent tens of thousands of dollars to defend themselves from the government's mistakes.

The government had to redo settlements with landowners after it realized it had failed to account for the valuable water rights associated with the properties, an oversight that added months to the compensation process.

On occasion, Homeland Security paid people for property they did not actually own. The agency did not attempt to recover the misdirected taxpayer funds, instead paying for land a second time once it determined the correct owners.

Nearly a decade later, scores of landowners remain tangled in lawsuits. The government has already taken their land and built the border fence. But it has not resolved claims for its value.

Happy now ?

HERE

This whole rant is about things that took place under Obama.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterDrakk
And it wont. Posse Comitatus.

quote:

It shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the
United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose
of executing the laws, except in such cases as may be expressly
authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress;

quote:

By 1986, even prominent civil libertarians began to question the
DOD’s reluctance to participate in protecting the border from foreign
threats,358 noting how easily terrorists could exploit this weakness.359

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
This whole rant is about things that took place under Obama.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam
"A new study of border takings under the 2006 Secure Fence Act"

I didn't know that Obama was President in 2006.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A new study of border takings under the 2006 Secure Fence Act finds that many owners get inadequate compensation, and that the condemnation process is flawed in other ways.

Making America 'white' again, will cost money and piss off a lot of land owners. Yep, that Trump guy, he's just like me and you, out for the little guy helping all he can and cleaning out the swamp alright.

Just 'give' the govt. your land...or else. You don't want to read these lowlights. Plus, we aren't up to the wall yet, we're still looking to replace fence from 2006. Headache on top of headache and the general incompetence.

Homeland Security circumvented laws designed to help landowners receive fair compensation. The agency did not conduct formal appraisals of targeted parcels. Instead, it issued low-ball offers based on substandard estimates of property values.

Larger, wealthier property owners who could afford lawyers negotiated deals that, on average, tripled the opening bids from Homeland Security. Smaller and poorer landholders took whatever the government offered — or wrung out small increases in settlements. The government conceded publicly that landowners without lawyers might wind up shortchanged, but did little to protect their interests.

The Justice Department bungled hundreds of condemnation cases. The agency took property without knowing the identity of the actual owners. It condemned land without researching facts as basic as property lines. Landholders spent tens of thousands of dollars to defend themselves from the government's mistakes.

The government had to redo settlements with landowners after it realized it had failed to account for the valuable water rights associated with the properties, an oversight that added months to the compensation process.

On occasion, Homeland Security paid people for property they did not actually own. The agency did not attempt to recover the misdirected taxpayer funds, instead paying for land a second time once it determined the correct owners.

Nearly a decade later, scores of landowners remain tangled in lawsuits. The government has already taken their land and built the border fence. But it has not resolved claims for its value.

Happy now ?

HERE

This whole rant is about things that took place under Obama.

"A new study of border takings under the 2006 Secure Fence Act"

I didn't know that Obama was President in 2006.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A new study of border takings under the 2006 Secure Fence Act finds that many owners get inadequate compensation, and that the condemnation process is flawed in other ways.

Making America 'white' again, will cost money and piss off a lot of land owners. Yep, that Trump guy, he's just like me and you, out for the little guy helping all he can and cleaning out the swamp alright.

Just 'give' the govt. your land...or else. You don't want to read these lowlights. Plus, we aren't up to the wall yet, we're still looking to replace fence from 2006. Headache on top of headache and the general incompetence.

Homeland Security circumvented laws designed to help landowners receive fair compensation. The agency did not conduct formal appraisals of targeted parcels. Instead, it issued low-ball offers based on substandard estimates of property values.

Larger, wealthier property owners who could afford lawyers negotiated deals that, on average, tripled the opening bids from Homeland Security. Smaller and poorer landholders took whatever the government offered — or wrung out small increases in settlements. The government conceded publicly that landowners without lawyers might wind up shortchanged, but did little to protect their interests.

The Justice Department bungled hundreds of condemnation cases. The agency took property without knowing the identity of the actual owners. It condemned land without researching facts as basic as property lines. Landholders spent tens of thousands of dollars to defend themselves from the government's mistakes.

The government had to redo settlements with landowners after it realized it had failed to account for the valuable water rights associated with the properties, an oversight that added months to the compensation process.

On occasion, Homeland Security paid people for property they did not actually own. The agency did not attempt to recover the misdirected taxpayer funds, instead paying for land a second time once it determined the correct owners.

Nearly a decade later, scores of landowners remain tangled in lawsuits. The government has already taken their land and built the border fence. But it has not resolved claims for its value.

Happy now ?

HERE

This whole rant is about things that took place under Obama.

"A new study of border takings under the 2006 Secure Fence Act"

I didn't know that Obama was President in 2006.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A new study of border takings under the 2006 Secure Fence Act finds that many owners get inadequate compensation, and that the condemnation process is flawed in other ways.

Making America 'white' again, will cost money and piss off a lot of land owners. Yep, that Trump guy, he's just like me and you, out for the little guy helping all he can and cleaning out the swamp alright.

Just 'give' the govt. your land...or else. You don't want to read these lowlights. Plus, we aren't up to the wall yet, we're still looking to replace fence from 2006. Headache on top of headache and the general incompetence.

Homeland Security circumvented laws designed to help landowners receive fair compensation. The agency did not conduct formal appraisals of targeted parcels. Instead, it issued low-ball offers based on substandard estimates of property values.

Larger, wealthier property owners who could afford lawyers negotiated deals that, on average, tripled the opening bids from Homeland Security. Smaller and poorer landholders took whatever the government offered — or wrung out small increases in settlements. The government conceded publicly that landowners without lawyers might wind up shortchanged, but did little to protect their interests.

The Justice Department bungled hundreds of condemnation cases. The agency took property without knowing the identity of the actual owners. It condemned land without researching facts as basic as property lines. Landholders spent tens of thousands of dollars to defend themselves from the government's mistakes.

The government had to redo settlements with landowners after it realized it had failed to account for the valuable water rights associated with the properties, an oversight that added months to the compensation process.

On occasion, Homeland Security paid people for property they did not actually own. The agency did not attempt to recover the misdirected taxpayer funds, instead paying for land a second time once it determined the correct owners.

Nearly a decade later, scores of landowners remain tangled in lawsuits. The government has already taken their land and built the border fence. But it has not resolved claims for its value.

Happy now ?

HERE

This whole rant is about things that took place under Obama.

"A new study of border takings under the 2006 Secure Fence Act"

I didn't know that Obama was President in 2006.

The vast majority was under Obama. none of it was under Trump.
And you Are on to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Nothing like turning your thread into a racism thread, the fact is despite scrotumus maximus sucking the kings cock ED is unconstitutional on its face. See Kelo.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Or take all the 'inhumane' land mines we have stuck in military warehouses and put em on the border.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

No, it's not but of course, Trump isn't the first but it's just now that his policies effect these land owners.

Making America 'great' again which kinda ridiculous to begin with. Certainly America being great in the first place, is, has been and will always be great. Of course, as long as you are not one of her targets.

With [his] entry restrictions, who Trump seeks to keep out, with this wall and who it seeks to keep out, all of the right wing howling about how 'these people have taken 'our' jobs...makes 'great' code word for Making America 'white again.'

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

More:

President George W. Bush’s push for comprehensive immigration reform, which would have legalized the unauthorized immigrants in the United States, gave the hawks their opportunity. In 2006, Congress approved the Secure Fence Act mandating nearly 700 miles of fencing on the border.

The president signed on to the bill hoping to placate the secure-the-border-first crowd and obtain the humane immigration changes that he wanted. This sales job enabled it to pass with bipartisan support from the likes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

The immigration reform never materialized, but fence construction was nearly complete by 2009, and there are now 617 total miles of physical barriers, 36 miles of which have two layers.

Here's the rub:

Trump has been adamant that his wall will be built “ahead of schedule.” For that to happen, he’ll need to avoid the various legal issues that plagued earlier efforts. Entities other than the federal government-states, Indian tribes, private individuals-control over two-thirds of borderland property.

Private parties own the vast majority of the border in Texas, and for this reason, roughly 70 percent of the existing border fence is located in California, Arizona, and New Mexico. Almost all of it is on federally controlled land.

The Bush administration bullied property owners, threatening to sue them if they did not “voluntarily” hand over the rights to their land. It offered no compensation for doing so. Thinking that they had no recourse, some people signed off, but others refused. The government then attempted to use eminent domain, a procedure Trump has long defended, to seize their property, but the lawsuits imposed serious delays-seven years in one case.

In 2009, the Homeland Security inspector general concluded that the Border Patrol had “achieved [its] progress primarily in areas where environmental and real estate issues did not cause significant delay.” One intransigent resident had owned his property since before the “Roosevelt easement,” which gives the federal government a 60-foot right of way along the border.

He fought the administration, so the fence had until recently a 1.2-mile gap on his land. Border residents fought more than a third of all land transfers, in fact. Because the Constitution promises just compensation for takings, Trump can do little to speed this process.

Native American tribes also have the capacity to stop construction of barriers. The Tohono O’odham Nation, which has land on both sides of the border, has already pledged to fight any efforts to build a wall there. In 2007, when the tribe allowed vehicle barriers to be constructed, the Bush administration ended up desecrating Indian burial grounds and digging up human remains.

The new president would need a stand-alone bill from Congress to condemn their land. Senate Democrats can (and likely would) filibuster such an effort.

Water rights have also been a problem for the fence. A 1970 treaty requires that the floodplain of the Rio Grande remain open to both sides of the border. The Obama administration attempted to build fences along the river anyway, but the treaty and the river’s floods forced the barrier to be placed so far into the interior of the United States that it has many holes to allow U.S. residents access to their property. These also provide an opportunity for border crossers.

HERE

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

btw. Illegal immigrants, non-Citizens, have no Constitutional rights. We respect their right to life in the name of decency and they must prove their lives are threatened if they are wanting "Sanctuary" but they have no rights. Nor do we in other countries unless it is by treaty.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

btw. Illegal immigrants, non-Citizens, have no Constitutional rights. We respect their right to life in the name of decency and they must prove their lives are threatened if they are wanting "Sanctuary" but they have no rights. Nor do we in other countries unless it is by treaty.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Synchronizing and integrating state National Guard units with those of the Armed Forces would place them under the control of the United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) that was egregiously created in 2002, allegedly to help fight the ‘War on Terror’ — one of the largest acts of treason ever perpetrated against U.S. citizens by its Government.

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 Prohibits Using the Military for Civilian Law Enforcement

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Synchronizing and integrating state National Guard units with those of the Armed Forces would place them under the control of the United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) that was egregiously created in 2002, allegedly to help fight the ‘War on Terror’ — one of the largest acts of treason ever perpetrated against U.S. citizens by its Government.

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 Prohibits Using the Military for Civilian Law Enforcement