Trump's Wall And Eminent Domain...

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I've posted links about this before. What he's doing is just plain wrong but he also said he wants to change the constitution so its easier for hm to steal land. He wants to make sure that what happened in Scotland does not happen here.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/25/world/europe/donald-trump-scotland-wall.html

Some of the families he is stealing land from have owned it for generations. He doesn't care. He also doesn't care that his wall is needless, won't work, will cost the middle class while enriching the 1%.

And damn RWNJs don't want to know how corrupt trumpery really is.

Yeah, some these lands have been in families for several generations. To forcibly seize them, is just wrong. I can't support that.

WTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?

What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?

You can't inject "feelings" into the equation when our national security is the topic

Nah, i think feelings are a part of it. What if it was your property?

Of course they're involved on the land owners part but that has nothing to do with the rights of the country to keep itself safe. If ever there was a time for eminent domain, this is it. Not a highway, not a railway, not a mall. American safety.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

They've already built 700 miles of barriers,they'll get the rest done.

It'll stall, unless Trump goes with other options in the areas where Citizens don't wanna give up their lands. It's gonna get tied up in the courts for many years. He could be long gone before a Wall is ever completed.

The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.

like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?

That wasn't a case eminent domain.

and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..


In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.

With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] Superior Court Judge Richard Williams ruled that because there were "no limits" on what Trump could do with the property, the plan to take Coking's property did not meet the test of law. But Williams' ruling did not reject the practice of using eminent domain to take private property from one individual and transferring it to another, which would eventually be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kelo v. City of New London.

Two other properties that prevailed against eminent domain eventually did sell: Sabatini's restaurant received $2.1 million and a pawnshop sold for $1.6 million. Their lots became part of a large lawn flanking a taxi stand for Trump's casino.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.


an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,

Did he get his parking garage?

 

[JBond]

They've already built 700 miles of barriers,they'll get the rest done.

It'll stall, unless Trump goes with other options in the areas where Citizens don't wanna give up their lands. It's gonna get tied up in the courts for many years. He could be long gone before a Wall is ever completed.

The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.

like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?

That wasn't a case eminent domain.

and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..


In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.

With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] Superior Court Judge Richard Williams ruled that because there were "no limits" on what Trump could do with the property, the plan to take Coking's property did not meet the test of law. But Williams' ruling did not reject the practice of using eminent domain to take private property from one individual and transferring it to another, which would eventually be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kelo v. City of New London.

Two other properties that prevailed against eminent domain eventually did sell: Sabatini's restaurant received $2.1 million and a pawnshop sold for $1.6 million. Their lots became part of a large lawn flanking a taxi stand for Trump's casino.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.


an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,

Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.

 

[Dschrute3]

I've posted links about this before. What he's doing is just plain wrong but he also said he wants to change the constitution so its easier for hm to steal land. He wants to make sure that what happened in Scotland does not happen here.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/25/world/europe/donald-trump-scotland-wall.html

Some of the families he is stealing land from have owned it for generations. He doesn't care. He also doesn't care that his wall is needless, won't work, will cost the middle class while enriching the 1%.

And damn RWNJs don't want to know how corrupt trumpery really is.

Yeah, some these lands have been in families for several generations. To forcibly seize them, is just wrong. I can't support that.

WTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?

What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?

I'd be more than happy to get paid and get rid of my problem with illegals constantly cutting my fences and trashing my property.

Yes, but that's you. It's not your lands.

 

[Correll]

Looks like Trump is planning to seize Citizens' lands to get the Wall built. It's mainly gonna happen in Texas. But are Texans gonna just sit back and allow the Government to take their lands? I wouldn't bet on it. I'm a Trump supporter and fully support revamping and improving our Immigration System. Because i do feel the System is in ruins. It is time to move towards ending Illegal Immigration all-together.

But that being said, i can't support Eminent Domain. I can't support forcing Citizens to give up their lands for the Wall. There has to be other solutions for those areas. And honestly, I actually find Trump's beliefs on Eminent Domain to be pretty disturbing.

What are your thoughts?

Building a Wall to protect our nation from invasion is a reasonable use of Eminent Domain.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I've posted links about this before. What he's doing is just plain wrong but he also said he wants to change the constitution so its easier for hm to steal land. He wants to make sure that what happened in Scotland does not happen here.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/25/world/europe/donald-trump-scotland-wall.html

Some of the families he is stealing land from have owned it for generations. He doesn't care. He also doesn't care that his wall is needless, won't work, will cost the middle class while enriching the 1%.

And damn RWNJs don't want to know how corrupt trumpery really is.

Yeah, some these lands have been in families for several generations. To forcibly seize them, is just wrong. I can't support that.

WTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?

What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?

I'd be more than happy to get paid and get rid of my problem with illegals constantly cutting my fences and trashing my property.

Yes, but that's you. It's not your lands.

Then why the **** did you ask me?

 

[Dschrute3]

Yeah, some these lands have been in families for several generations. To forcibly seize them, is just wrong. I can't support that.

WTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?

What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?

You can't inject "feelings" into the equation when our national security is the topic

Nah, i think feelings are a part of it. What if it was your property?

Of course they're involved on the land owners part but that has nothing to do with the rights of the country to keep itself safe. If ever there was a time for eminent domain, this is it. Not a highway, not a railway, not a mall. American safety.

Well, we'll agree to disagree on this one. I think Trump would be wise to come up with other options in those areas. It's gonna be tied up in the courts for years. He'll never get his Wall. Seizing these lands by force isn't the answer. But that's just my feeling anyway.

 

[mudwhistle]

Find one Texas rancher on the Mexican border who voted DEM.
These ranchers have already made deals with the Gov. to lease the land.
They are getting a lot more in lease fees than they get from grazing a few head of cattle on the narrow strips of land involved.
Everyone is happy with the deals except the mexican cartels and the DEM party who are watching tens of thousands of illegals, who they assumed are one day going to vote DEM now being kept out of the US.
Maybe the DEMs should be going back to the negro 'well' again.

Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.

Just build the wall on the other side of those complaining.

Trump's Wall may be crumbling before it's even begun being built. Texans don't just roll over to Government. They will fight.

As a Texan who's lived near the border,I can tell you with complete confidence that the vast majority want the wall or some kind of protection against the invaders.
They cut their fences releasing cattle,break into their houses and leave garbage everywhere.

I want better border security too. But is Government seizing Citizens' lands really the answer? I can't support that.

Bullshit story.
Obama seized a shitload of land....so did Clinton and claimed it was national park property

This is just a fake news story.

 

[Dschrute3]

It'll stall, unless Trump goes with other options in the areas where Citizens don't wanna give up their lands. It's gonna get tied up in the courts for many years. He could be long gone before a Wall is ever completed.

The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.

like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?

That wasn't a case eminent domain.

and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..


In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.

With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] Superior Court Judge Richard Williams ruled that because there were "no limits" on what Trump could do with the property, the plan to take Coking's property did not meet the test of law. But Williams' ruling did not reject the practice of using eminent domain to take private property from one individual and transferring it to another, which would eventually be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kelo v. City of New London.

Two other properties that prevailed against eminent domain eventually did sell: Sabatini's restaurant received $2.1 million and a pawnshop sold for $1.6 million. Their lots became part of a large lawn flanking a taxi stand for Trump's casino.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.


an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,

Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.

Do you watch Fox News? They just did a report on the issue. Some are gonna fight the Government on this. It's gonna be in the courts for years. If Trump goes this route, he'll never see a Wall.

 

[Dschrute3]

Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.

Just build the wall on the other side of those complaining.

Trump's Wall may be crumbling before it's even begun being built. Texans don't just roll over to Government. They will fight.

As a Texan who's lived near the border,I can tell you with complete confidence that the vast majority want the wall or some kind of protection against the invaders.
They cut their fences releasing cattle,break into their houses and leave garbage everywhere.

I want better border security too. But is Government seizing Citizens' lands really the answer? I can't support that.

Bullshit story.
Obama seized a shitload of land....so did Clinton and claimed it was national park property

This is just a fake news story.

Did you approve of that? I didn't.

 

[Dschrute3]

Looks like Trump is planning to seize Citizens' lands to get the Wall built. It's mainly gonna happen in Texas. But are Texans gonna just sit back and allow the Government to take their lands? I wouldn't bet on it. I'm a Trump supporter and fully support revamping and improving our Immigration System. Because i do feel the System is in ruins. It is time to move towards ending Illegal Immigration all-together.

But that being said, i can't support Eminent Domain. I can't support forcing Citizens to give up their lands for the Wall. There has to be other solutions for those areas. And honestly, I actually find Trump's beliefs on Eminent Domain to be pretty disturbing.

What are your thoughts?

Building a Wall to protect our nation from invasion is a reasonable use of Eminent Domain.

I disagree.

"Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." - Benjamin Franklin

 

[koshergrl]

Find one Texas rancher on the Mexican border who voted DEM.
These ranchers have already made deals with the Gov. to lease the land.
They are getting a lot more in lease fees than they get from grazing a few head of cattle on the narrow strips of land involved.
Everyone is happy with the deals except the mexican cartels and the DEM party who are watching tens of thousands of illegals, who they assumed are one day going to vote DEM now being kept out of the US.
Maybe the DEMs should be going back to the negro 'well' again.

Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.

Some probably won't have to move very far. A lot of that area is small-ish houses on a lot of land.

There's nothing wrong with imminent domain in this situation. Sure there will be a holdout here and there. They'll get money and move and that will be that.

For the safety and security of the country, that's pretty much the ONLY time it's prescribed.

Dems don't get it. They never will.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.

like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?

That wasn't a case eminent domain.

and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..


In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.

With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] Superior Court Judge Richard Williams ruled that because there were "no limits" on what Trump could do with the property, the plan to take Coking's property did not meet the test of law. But Williams' ruling did not reject the practice of using eminent domain to take private property from one individual and transferring it to another, which would eventually be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kelo v. City of New London.

Two other properties that prevailed against eminent domain eventually did sell: Sabatini's restaurant received $2.1 million and a pawnshop sold for $1.6 million. Their lots became part of a large lawn flanking a taxi stand for Trump's casino.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.


an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,

Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.

Do you watch Fox News? They just did a report on the issue. Some are gonna fight the Government on this. It's gonna be in the courts for years. If Trump goes this route, he'll never see a Wall.

As I said earlier the solution is simple.
You build the wall until you hit the holdouts property thus funneling all illegal traffic onto his property.
We'll see how long he holds out.

 

[JBond]

The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.

like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?

That wasn't a case eminent domain.

and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..


In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.

With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] Superior Court Judge Richard Williams ruled that because there were "no limits" on what Trump could do with the property, the plan to take Coking's property did not meet the test of law. But Williams' ruling did not reject the practice of using eminent domain to take private property from one individual and transferring it to another, which would eventually be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kelo v. City of New London.

Two other properties that prevailed against eminent domain eventually did sell: Sabatini's restaurant received $2.1 million and a pawnshop sold for $1.6 million. Their lots became part of a large lawn flanking a taxi stand for Trump's casino.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.


an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,

Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.

Do you watch Fox News? They just did a report on the issue. Some are gonna fight the Government on this. It's gonna be in the courts for years. If Trump goes this route, he'll never see a Wall.

I rarely watch any news channels with the exception of the BBC. Has Fox posted a link to the story? I would like to see it.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

WTF do you think they're going to do,take the whole fucken ranch or something?

What if it were your lands? Would you see things differently?

You can't inject "feelings" into the equation when our national security is the topic

Nah, i think feelings are a part of it. What if it was your property?

Of course they're involved on the land owners part but that has nothing to do with the rights of the country to keep itself safe. If ever there was a time for eminent domain, this is it. Not a highway, not a railway, not a mall. American safety.

Well, we'll agree to disagree on this one. I think Trump would be wise to come up with other options in those areas. It's gonna be tied up in the courts for years. He'll never get his Wall. Seizing these lands by force isn't the answer. But that's just my feeling anyway.

Well you're essentially taking the position that it is unconstitutional under any circumstances if national security doesn't qualify.
Property is taken everyday in this country for much less. Such as the sidewalk that is between your yard & the street or the lane expansion of a highway. If this scenario doesn't qualify in your mind what scenario would?

 

[mudwhistle]

The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.

like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?

That wasn't a case eminent domain.

and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..


In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.

With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] Superior Court Judge Richard Williams ruled that because there were "no limits" on what Trump could do with the property, the plan to take Coking's property did not meet the test of law. But Williams' ruling did not reject the practice of using eminent domain to take private property from one individual and transferring it to another, which would eventually be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kelo v. City of New London.

Two other properties that prevailed against eminent domain eventually did sell: Sabatini's restaurant received $2.1 million and a pawnshop sold for $1.6 million. Their lots became part of a large lawn flanking a taxi stand for Trump's casino.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.


an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,

Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.

Do you watch Fox News? They just did a report on the issue. Some are gonna fight the Government on this. It's gonna be in the courts for years. If Trump goes this route, he'll never see a Wall.

The only story I saw was California telling private companies they'd better not build the wall.

There's already an easement along the border for government use same as the easement utility companies have on private property.

 

[Dschrute3]

Find one Texas rancher on the Mexican border who voted DEM.
These ranchers have already made deals with the Gov. to lease the land.
They are getting a lot more in lease fees than they get from grazing a few head of cattle on the narrow strips of land involved.
Everyone is happy with the deals except the mexican cartels and the DEM party who are watching tens of thousands of illegals, who they assumed are one day going to vote DEM now being kept out of the US.
Maybe the DEMs should be going back to the negro 'well' again.

Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.

Some probably won't have to move very far. A lot of that area is small-ish houses on a lot of land.

There's nothing wrong with imminent domain in this situation. Sure there will be a holdout here and there. They'll get money and move and that will be that.

For the safety and security of the country, that's pretty much the ONLY time it's prescribed.

Dems don't get it. They never will.

I'm not a Democrat.

"Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." - Benjamin Franklin

 

[Dschrute3]

like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?

That wasn't a case eminent domain.

and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..


In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.

With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] Superior Court Judge Richard Williams ruled that because there were "no limits" on what Trump could do with the property, the plan to take Coking's property did not meet the test of law. But Williams' ruling did not reject the practice of using eminent domain to take private property from one individual and transferring it to another, which would eventually be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kelo v. City of New London.

Two other properties that prevailed against eminent domain eventually did sell: Sabatini's restaurant received $2.1 million and a pawnshop sold for $1.6 million. Their lots became part of a large lawn flanking a taxi stand for Trump's casino.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.


an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,

Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.

Do you watch Fox News? They just did a report on the issue. Some are gonna fight the Government on this. It's gonna be in the courts for years. If Trump goes this route, he'll never see a Wall.

As I said earlier the solution is simple.
You build the wall until you hit the holdouts property thus funneling all illegal traffic onto his property.
We'll see how long he holds out.

That's Un-American Bullshite.

"Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." - Benjamin Franklin

 

[bendog]

It'll stall, unless Trump goes with other options in the areas where Citizens don't wanna give up their lands. It's gonna get tied up in the courts for many years. He could be long gone before a Wall is ever completed.

The law is clear. There will be no long lawsuits.

like the long law suit that an old lady handcuffed Trump to the court with when he tried to steal her hose ans build a parking lot?

That wasn't a case eminent domain.

and you dont know your ass from a hole in the ground ..


In 1993, Donald Trump bought several lots around his Atlantic City casino and hotel, intending to build a parking lot designed for limousines.[3] Coking, who had lived in her house at that time for 32 years, refused to sell. As a result, the city condemned her house, using the power of eminent domain. She was offered $251,000,[4] which was about one quarter of what she was offered by Guccione 10 years earlier.

With the assistance of the Institute for Justice, Coking fought the local authorities and eventually prevailed.[5] Superior Court Judge Richard Williams ruled that because there were "no limits" on what Trump could do with the property, the plan to take Coking's property did not meet the test of law. But Williams' ruling did not reject the practice of using eminent domain to take private property from one individual and transferring it to another, which would eventually be upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in Kelo v. City of New London.

Two other properties that prevailed against eminent domain eventually did sell: Sabatini's restaurant received $2.1 million and a pawnshop sold for $1.6 million. Their lots became part of a large lawn flanking a taxi stand for Trump's casino.[1][6] Coking remained in her house until 2010, when she moved to a retirement home in the San Francisco Bay Area near her daughter and grandchildren.


an old woman tied him up in court for 11 years,and never gave up her home .. wait until Texas Ranchers get him by the nutsack,

Where are all these pissed ranchers you keep babbling about? Post your source.

The land belonged to the US gummit.

History Of The Federal Use Of Eminent Domain | ENRD | Department of Justice

It was never about eminent domain, really. The fed govt took ownership GENERATIONS ago, but people were allowed to use the land. As the article disuccess, the first sagebrush rebellion occurred as environmental regs crowed out some uses.

Bundy and his friends had a legit beef (pun). But basically what happened was their use of the land to raise cattle cannot be economically sustained without being able to use the land as their forefathers use it.

 

[koshergrl]

Find one Texas rancher on the Mexican border who voted DEM.
These ranchers have already made deals with the Gov. to lease the land.
They are getting a lot more in lease fees than they get from grazing a few head of cattle on the narrow strips of land involved.
Everyone is happy with the deals except the mexican cartels and the DEM party who are watching tens of thousands of illegals, who they assumed are one day going to vote DEM now being kept out of the US.
Maybe the DEMs should be going back to the negro 'well' again.

Did they have a choice? So no, 'Everyone' is definitely not happy. Many don't want to give up their lands for the Wall. They're shocked and angry that it's gonna be done by force.

Some probably won't have to move very far. A lot of that area is small-ish houses on a lot of land.

There's nothing wrong with imminent domain in this situation. Sure there will be a holdout here and there. They'll get money and move and that will be that.

For the safety and security of the country, that's pretty much the ONLY time it's prescribed.

Dems don't get it. They never will.

I'm not a Democrat.

"Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." - Benjamin Franklin

I actually wasn't referring to you.