[proust]

I remember when freepers were arguing against Trump in the primaries due to his past experiences with eminent domain. Somehow that disqualified him from being worthy of the conservative vote.

How do you like him now?

[Jane Long]

😁

[Pollster1]

I remember when freepers were arguing against Trump . . . How do you like him now?

As one of those Freepers, I remember having that concern; using eminent domain made him look like an insider. Trump is a former democrat who donated generously to some of the most evil democrats in our country, and that also made me nervous. Then Cruz blamed Trump for democrat-initiated violence, and that silliness convinced me that Trump was the best among a questionable set of options - risky but better than the alternatives.

I have never in my life been so thrilled to be so wrong. More than any president in my lifetime, Trump's tenure has been defined by keeping his word on campaign pledges. Eminent Domain for its real purpose - to perform the constitutionally-mandated duties of FedGov? That's why we voted for President Trump!

[Yosemitest]

I was one of the ones that argued against was Trump did to Vera Coking.

Vera Coking walks past Donald Trump, obscured against wall at left, in a courtroom hallway
at Atlantic County Superior Court on Feb. 13, 1997.
... Trump wanted Coking's house - - not to live in, but as a place to park limousines for his casino next door.

"It is a classic case of a schoolyard bully growing up," said Clint Bolick, who co-founded the legal institute that defended Coking in a 1990s lawsuit with Trump ... "He's a thug."

Coking and her husband bought the white, three-story house at 127 Columbia Pl. in 1961, long before the area was transformed by mega-casinos.
She raised her children there.
For a time, she operated it as a boarding house.

... Coking, who is now more than 90 years old and was not available to be interviewed, was having none of it.
This was her "dream house," said Dana Berliner ...

Coking held firm, even as the 22-story Trump Plaza soared outside her windows with its ever-flashing lights.
The house was deteriorating, but Coking's will wasn't.
Demolition crews had set fire to her roof, broken windows and smashed up much of the third floor, according to her attorneys.
Still, she didn't move.

... Trump, Coking and the casino authority pounded away at one another in court.
Then, one day in the summer of 1998, the Superior Court of New Jersey put an end to the conflict.
The court ruled that the casino authority and Trump were wrong.
The government couldn't take Coking's house and let Trump have it.

That kind of ABUSE of "eminent domain" is wrong, and the court ruled against Trump.

Now, the border wall is about NATIONAL SECURITY, not taking property so a PRIVATE COMPANY can make money.

Do you have any more STUPID questions ?

[piasa]

A border fence is arguably for national defense, but he makes me nervous that he has an overly broad idea of what eminent domain was for when he includes non-defense installation such as schools, businesses and so on.

What makes the country great isn’t another mini-mall or golf course on stolen land, it’s the once-held not too oft forgotten belief that property rights were fundamental to liberty.

[wildcard_redneck]

“How do you like him now?”

Love President Trump. There are a lot of Romney-bots here that don’t.

[eartick]

How do you like him now?

I am very optimistic in the outcome. ED when used for the right purpose, such as national security for all Americans is the right direction. ED to benefit a globalist's pocket book is wrong and has been used before.

We had over 2500 acres taken from our family to build a training airport for our Navy. We were compensated at the time but hated to lose the property. In my view this is the proper use of ED.