If real-estate magnate/pink-slip impresario Donald Trump can’t comb over his hair plausibly, how does he expect to convincingly coif his wheeler-dealer track record?
Over the past several months, Trump has been making disturbing noises about pursuing the GOP presidential nomination. Perhaps those encouraging him want the Republicans to remain almost as unpalatable to freedom-loving folk as the Democrats.
Trump has an atrocious track record when it comes to limited government and private property. Like many developers in collusion with bureaucrats and the tax man, he doesn’t hesitate to use eminent domain to steal what ain’t his. All in the name of the so-called “public good,” of course, a catchall concept used to excuse almost any kind of ruthless predation.
Michelle Malkin reminds us that in the 1990s Trump “waged a notorious war on elderly homeowner Vera Coking, who owned a little home in Atlantic City.… The real-estate mogul was determined to expand his Trump Plaza and build a limousine parking lot — Coking’s private property be damned.” Fortunately, the valiant Institute for Justice took up her cause. She prevailed.
Trump’s comments on the 2005 Supreme Court decision Kelo v. City of New London are candid enough. The justices ruled that government officials could treat the Constitution as irrelevant with respect to property. Trump says he agrees “100 percent “ with the Kelo decision.
That confession alone makes the idea of a President Donald Trump 100 percent repugnant.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
10 replies on “Trump vs. Private Property”
Thanks. Important and timely.
What is USUALLY ignored in the Trump buildup is this MINOR INCONVIENCE.
HE IS A MEMBER OF THE LUCKY SPERM CLUB.
HIS FATHER WAS THE BRILLIANT BUSINESSMAN WHO WAS THE BUILDER — DONEALD TRUMP STARTED WITH HSI FATHER’S NAME RECOGNITION AND MONEY.
AND HSI ATLANTIC CITY CASINOS FACED DEFAULT AND HEFT LOSSES-AND HE AHD GOVERNMENT HELP TO SAVE THEM.
AND DON’T FORGET, SOEM YEARS AGO, A SECURITIES ANALYST AT A SMALL FIRM PREDICTED THAT THE ATLANTIC CITY CASINOS (THAT TRUMP OWNED/OWNS/CONTROLS) WERE IN FINANCIAL DIFFICULTY-SO HE THREATENED THE FIRM IF THEY DIDN’T FIRE THE ANALYST. ( THEY DID, AND A PRIVATE FIRM HIRED HIM, IF I REMEMEBR CORRECTLY).
HE IS, IN MY OPINION, NOTHIGN MORE THEN AN INFLATED EOIST. A PERFECT MATCH FOR OBAMA.
Thank you, Mr Jacob, for reminding us all of lifetime New York “Democrat,” Mr Trump’s track record.
And for causing all of those of us to whom these things are important to reflect on the reality that Mr Trump has long been to Capitalism what Ross Perot was to the reelection campaign of then president, George Herbert Walker Bush and that he offers the 2012 Republican Primaries pretty much what Ross Perot offered the reelection campaign of then president, George Herbert Walker Bush!
Sorry if any spelling errors in the above.
Perhaps the Donald can serve as cannon fodder, continuing to fill up the air with irrelevance and having Presbo expend campaign funds and public interet on irrelevance, much like the straw dogs of old, then retreating at the last moment to let the more viable folks have a good run.
Hmm, I’m surprised you disagree with the S.C.? Please correct me if I am wrong but I thought that Kelo, though absolutely immoral, should be a state affair and that the feds should not involve themselves in such. If this is not true what is the principle between determining state and federal authority and should this line ever change from case to case? Don’t get me wrong — I’m all for abolishing all government violence.
[…] Over the past several months, Trump has been making disturbing noises about pursuing the GOP presidential nomination. Perhaps those encouraging him want the Republicans to remain almost as unpalatable to freedom-loving folk as the Democrats. https://thisiscommonsense.org////?p=6374 […]
[…] Retrieved from Make sure to also read: https://thisiscommonsense.org////?p=6374 […]
To ff42
To ff42
The Kelo decision doesn’t distinguish between federal and state/local governments taking property for “public” use.
I believe Jacob (and many others including myself) consider taking private property to give to another private entity, to be other than for “public” use, even if it leads to increased tax revenue (which, BTW, didn’t occur in Kelo’s case). The use, is to the developer and to the politicians who are approving it (probably as the result of bribes, I mean campaign cash). It’s certainly not to the owners of the property who’d rather not sell. If the developer wants it, he should pay what the owners will willingly accept.