Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Trump Claims Eminent Domain is ‘Wonderful’, Rubio Says ‘He’s Wrong’

    Trump Claims Eminent Domain is ‘Wonderful’, Rubio Says ‘He’s Wrong’

    It’s not like Granny needed her land anyway…

    During an interview with Special Report‘s Brett Baier Tuesday night, Republican presidential contender Donald Trump said eminent domain is a “wonderful thing.”

    “I think eminent domain is wonderful if you’re building a highway and you need to build, as an example, a highway, and you’re going to be blocked by a hold-out or, in some cases, it’s a hold-out. Just so you understand, nobody knows this better than I do, because I built a lot of buildings in Manhattan and you’ll have 12 sites and you’ll get 11 and you’ll have the one hold-out and you end up building around them and everything else, OK. So I know it better than anybody.”

    Eminent domain being the government’s “right” to swipe property they deem essential for public works or other developmental projects. Opposition to government seizure of private property for the purpose of building condos and parking lots should be a no-brainer for private property rights advocates (and just about anyone with Conservative political leanings).

    Fellow Republican presidential candidate Senator Marco Rubio disagrees with Trump. Speaking to The Weekly Standard Wednesday, Rubio said, “he’s wrong.”

    “In Florida when I was a state legislator, we passed what has become model legislation for other states around the country–that I actually passed–both a law and a constitutional amendment that keeps developers like Donald Trump from using eminent domain to take private property away from an owner and give it to another private owner, which is what the Kelo decision said should be legal unless states barred it. So he’s wrong about that. One of the most important rights Americans have is private property.”

    Realistically, eminent domain isn’t used for the public good as often as it’s used to cushion city and developer pockets. In fact, eminent domain is so wonderful, the city of Houston is currently using the private property seizure discretion to threaten two long-standing churches into selling their land to make way for real-estate development.

    The Weekly Standard also noted, Trump once utilized the power of eminent domain to build a limousine parking lot:

    Executive vice president of the Cato Institute, David Boaz, wrote in The Guardian:

    For more than 30 years Vera Coking lived in a three-story house just off the Boardwalk in Atlantic City. Donald Trump built his 22-story Trump Plaza next door. In the mid-1990s Trump wanted to build a limousine parking lot for the hotel, so he bought several nearby properties. But three owners, including the by then elderly and widowed Ms Coking, refused to sell.

    Trump turned to a government agency – the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (CRDA) – to take Coking’s property. CRDA offered her $250,000 for the property – one-fourth of what another hotel builder had offered her a decade earlier. When she turned that down, the agency went into court to claim her property under eminent domain so that Trump could pave it and put up a parking lot.

    It’s not like Granny needed her land anyway…

    Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    Wow, OK I’m soooo convinced – Rubio will take ALL the voters away, give them to his mentor Jeb! … and the BIG BUSINESS of 1 party USA suck-the-treasury-dry will continue.

    Open your eyes. WHY are the 0% or 1-5% Rs still even IN the R race at this point? Cause’ their donors SAY SO. The GOPe has a BIG plan – and their plan is Jeb! or Hillary. Either or, they don’t care.

    Trump playing the long game. Trump/Cruz if you want to save the USA…

    BIG picture… and FOX is PRO JEB! = 100%


      Hi Lisa, I’m willing to be convinced, just tell me how it’s okay for Trump, as a private citizen, to use eminent domain to try to take a woman’s family home so he can build a casino parking lot for limos. You may well have a point, but I haven’t seen you explain it. Would you happily vacate and hand over your family home so Trump can build a parking lot? Would you be happy if the state made moves to force you to do so against your will? This stuff matters. It goes to the core of Trump, of who he is and of what matters to him, of the role he sees government playing in our lives (and it’s YUGE if you haven’t been paying close attention).

      Bashing Fox gets you nowhere. Most of us have been conservative since long before Fox was a twinkle in Murdoch’s eye. You do know it’s only been around since the mid-90’s right? I have pantyhose older than that. And I have Constitutional conservative principles way way older than even my oldest pair of pantyhose. 🙂

        Trump didn’t try to take her home the government did. But all of this is completely irrelevant to Trump as president. Takings of little old ladies house are done by city and county governments. Not the feds or the lresident.

        Trump wanted to expand the capacity and number of rooms to his hotel. That would have meant hundreds of construction worker and hotel jobs for the city. But you can’t add rooms without adding parking. Trump offered granny 5 million for her house 10 times what it was worth. Years later granny sold it for 500k. She saved Trump many tens of millions of dollars by trying to get more money for her house. He didn’t expand and when the hotel and casino business crashed in Atlantic city his losses were less. She should have taken tbe 5 million.

          Henry Hawkins in reply to garybritt. | October 8, 2015 at 7:56 pm

          Neither Trump nor land developers decide what someone’s home is worth to them. They can approach a price, but that is an entirely different thing than worth.

          Please do us the favor of getting video when they come for your house.

            If somebody comes for my house with 5 million dollars to give me I hope they bring a pen so I can sign the papers without delay. Obviously granny wasn’t against selling. She sold it and moved to california. She just sold it for 4.5 MM less than trump offered. The constitution requires just compensation not subjective worth. However remember I am against Kelo type takings being legal but those types of takings don’t have anything to do with the president. Nobody should be surprised if a real estate developer tries to take advantage of the laws and rulings that created Kelo type takings. It would be a surprise if they didn’t. The only eminent domain president trump will do is to build the wall which is perfectly proper use of this constitutional power.

    Erudite Mavin | October 7, 2015 at 10:27 pm

    Rubio again is correct.

    This subject is not new re Trump

    Donald Trump’s eminent-domain empire

    By Michelle Malkin  •  April 22, 2011

    Don’t be fooled by The Donald. Take it from one who knows: I’m a South Jersey gal who was raised on the outskirts of Atlantic City in the looming shadow of Trump’s towers. All through my childhood, casino developers and government bureaucrats joined hands, raised taxes and made dazzling promises of urban renewal. Then we wised up to the eminent-domain thievery championed by our hometown faux free-marketeers…..
    (the link below has the entire article on trump)

    When Malkin exposed Trump, he couldn’t refute it but did
    his usual trash talk, among them was the following

    Trump said to Malkin: “You were born stupid!”

      Can you please point me to b the part of the Malkin article that states tge President and federal government was involved in these eminent domain takings? Because the part you quoted says it was local city government that was doing it and not the president. This supports my point that Trump as president can be wrong on Kelo takings and it doesn’t matter because the president doesn have anything to do with local government eminent domain decisions. Those decisions are controlled by state legislatures.

      So Trump is wrong on Kelo style takings. I agree, but since the president doesn’t have anything to do with local government eminent domain takings it doesn’t affect my vote for Trump.

        Sammy Finkelman in reply to garybritt. | October 8, 2015 at 12:40 am

        The Federal givernment also uses eminent domain. But it is a small part of what the federal government does. There are stories here, though, too, about houses destroyed and things that were never built.

        Trump might have to use eminent domain to build his fence.

          Eminent domain abuse are tge KELO type takings where property is not taken for direct public use. The federal government and the president don’t use eminent domain for Kelo type takings tge feds use it for true public use. Things like the intercontinental railroads in the 1800s and the interstate highway system in the 1960s and 1970s. All proper stuff for eminent domains.

          Kelo abuse happens because of local city and county politicians.

          So again Trumps personal opinion on Kelo can be wrong but since the president doesn’t have anything to do with Kelo takings it doesn’t matter.

          This is all just a phony issue whipped up by the liberal pro Hillary media and jumped on here by the anti Trump crowd and resident members of the TDS Society.

            Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | October 8, 2015 at 11:08 am

            No, you lying SOS II. Property crimes by statists happen BECAUSE of the demand for them by people like T-rump.

            They BUY them. They DEMAND them. Because THAT’S who they ARE.

        Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | October 8, 2015 at 7:24 am

        What it PROVES, against all your dissembling and apologia, is that T-rump is the crony capitalist oligarch you’ve been told he is, THE Mr. Establishment personified.

        He would act in conformity with who he’s ALWAYS been. He would abuse power, as he’s ALWAYS done.

        He’s a fraudster, running under a false flag.

          As long as Trump is the only candidate promising to use his power to implement the Jeff Sessions immigration plan he is the only candidate worth voting for. The fact that Trump won’t be cowered by the media and knows how to weild power is a PLUS.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | October 8, 2015 at 11:12 am

          Yah, yah. You’ve said that before. Principles be damned. Duh Donanld is your guy!

          Cool. Vote for him when you have a chance. Big FLUCKING deal. I’ll cancel your vote here in Texas, ya unprincipled pretender of conservative ANYTHING!

    Ragspierre | October 8, 2015 at 7:51 am

    How familiar is this…!!!

    “Lest you think conservatives are happy with Donald Trump‘s re-entrance into the presidential race, conservative pundit/blogger Michelle Malkin was extremely critical of Trump’s antics on Twitter earlier today. Malkin was set off after Trump tweeted out to his followers, “How does [Malkin] get a conservative platform? She is a dummy–just look at her past.”’

    But note the year! It’s like déjà vu all over again!

      Michelle Malkin is an idiot. Worse she is almost always boring and rarely has anything original to say. I can’t stand watching her on video because she looks like she should have a fish hook in her mouth.

        I can’t stand watching her on video because she looks like she should have a fish hook in her mouth.

        You guys really have a problem with strong women, don’t you.

        Do you even have any idea how creepy you all look, acting this way?

          I stated she is borinvg and rarely as anything original to say. Those are reasons not to like her. Nothing to do with her being a strong woman. I like the right kind of strong woman like Margaret Thatcher. I liked Fiorina until I realized she was an amnesty open borders loving Bush establishment republican. You don’t lime Hillary does that make you anti strong woman.

          Its not my fault every time I see Malkin on TV I have an instinctive reaction to either reach for the remote or reach for my tackle box.

    We’ve got people here defending a politician’s calls for more and higher taxes, bigger and more powerful government, the right of the rich and well-connected to use the State to seize poorer and less-well-connected citizens’ property, socialized medicine… and yet they still pretend that they were ever small-government Tea Party conservatives?

    This is a very weird time in American politics.

      Ragspierre in reply to Amy in FL. | October 8, 2015 at 8:59 am

      There’s this, too…

      T-rump is no respecter of property in any form. He fully believes he has the right to tell others how, where, and when they can use THEIR property, and who they may trade with.

      It’s all of a piece. And it’s wrong.

      Note, too, that the Trumpkins all accuse critics of being Fox News robots parroting the company line, meanwhile each one of them peddles the exact same talking points.

      The answer is simple. Some of us have the foresight to understand that if we don’t get illegal and legal immigration right none of the things on your list will matter or even be possible.

      Trumps tax plan is brilliant because it can’t be attacked just as tax cuts for the rich. Varney and company called it reaganesque. Said unlike Bush Trump could sell it and it was blessed by Grover Norquist, Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh.

      His 2nd amendment policy papers are extremely strong pro self defense.

      Yesterday in Las Vegas he spoke to a packed house of 1500 while Rubio spoke to 100 to 200. Trump had very excited hispanics for Trump in attendance.

        Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | October 9, 2015 at 12:07 pm

        “Trumps tax plan is brilliant because it can’t be attacked just as tax cuts for the rich.”

        Yep. You’re a liar or an idiot…or a lying idiot!

        The analysis is pretty good, too. Take it on, Mr. CPA. On the FACTS.

          I didn’t say the liberals wouldn’t try to attack it. They just won’t be successful. Not with Trump defending. On the other hand they would be very successful attacking the similar tax plans from Bush or the flat tax plans of some of the others. You need to have some perspective Mr. NOT CPA.

            Interesting that the resident leader of the TDS society here and the resident guardian of all things conservative quotes the New York Times. Ragzini, you need to make up your mind whether you are for or against conservative tax plans. You seem to be on the side of the New York Times and against conservative tax plans. What conservative tax plan won’t be attacked by the New York Times?? Or is it that you are crazily inconsistent with your posts railing first against Trump’s tax plan claiming it was tax the rich and give to the poor (it isn’t which you have now conceded) and now railing against it because you agree with the New York Times that it is too conservative and cuts taxes for the rich too much. Geesh. Pick a side and try to stay on it longer than Hillary at least.

          Ragzini: The New York Times “analysis is pretty good, too.”

          So you are now a liberal that opposes conservative tax plans like Mr. Trump’s. Let’s see. Grover Norquist, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Varney and company all love Trump’s tax plan and Ragzini siding with the New York Times doesn’t like it.

          Good to know Ragzini is a New York Times left wing media following liberal.

            Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | October 9, 2015 at 1:09 pm

            But lying idiot…

            Attacking me or the New York times is not dealing with the analysis of the author, who points out that the T-rump tax plan IS NOT a “tax the rich” tax plan, as YOUR little yellow god said it was.

            Now, take on the FACTUAL analysis, you stupid, lying POS.

        Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | October 9, 2015 at 1:18 pm

        “Or is it that you are crazily inconsistent with your posts railing first against Trump’s tax plan claiming it was tax the rich and give to the poor (it isn’t which you have now conceded) and now railing against it because you agree with the New York Times that it is too conservative and cuts taxes for the rich too much. Geesh.”

        No, you lying SOS, I NEVER said any such thing.

        What I DID point out is that the T-rump tax plan is just tinkering with the dials, leaving the corrupt tax code in place. It EXPRESSLY limits the tax-paying population in a way the is TERRIBLE for any notion of a sound tax policy on the basis of good civics in a republic.

        It ALSO is ASTOUNDINGLY NOT “revenue neutral”, as scored by conservative tax policy wonks. It WILL add enormously to our deficit, EVEN if you allow the pie-in-sky bullshit lies about wealth formation it makes.

        I ALSO, CORRECTLY, pointed out that it is NOT a “tax the rich” plan as Duh Donald describe it. It is NOT that, and he lied. Again.

          Rags, please name the republican presidential candidate tax plan that won’t be attacked by the New York Times, that won’t be judged as increasing the deficit by the New York Times, and is the one you support?? Then tell us how the one you support is different from Mr. Trump’s plan.

            Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | October 9, 2015 at 9:11 pm

            Lying SOS, you didn’t provide ANY factual counter to the NYT author.

            Because you can’t. You’re a lying, pretending “CPA” who can’t counter the arguments made by a real tax authority!

            Now, I’ll answer your bullshit….

            There isn’t a real conservative plan that would not be criticized by SOME Collectivist writer. But they would be REAL CONSERVATIVE plans, like the fair tax plan or the flat tax plan…which your little yellow god PRETENDED to support recently.

            You didn’t read the NYT piece, you lying SOS. It didn’t make any judgment as to the increase in the deficit.

            THAT comes from conservative tax wonks, you lying SOS.

        Ragspierre in reply to garybritt. | October 9, 2015 at 1:29 pm

        “I didn’t say the liberals wouldn’t try to attack it. They just won’t be successful. Not with Trump defending.”


        Now we have Underwear Gnome TAX Policy to go with

        Underwear Gnome Civics

        Underwear Gnome Foreign Policy

        Underwear Gnome Economics and

        all the other expressions of blind faith you slavishly adhere to.

    clintack | October 8, 2015 at 1:25 pm

    Let’s all start practicing to say, “President Rubio” and try to come up with ways to get him to toe the line on Immigration…

    Re: Supreme Court appointments… I had a dream last night that Ruth Bader Ginsberg retired from the Supreme Court, President Obama nominated himself to fill her vacancy, and President Biden declared he’d be running for reelection. I woke up while Vice President Elizabeth Warren was being sworn in.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend