I belatedly watched an episode of John Oliver's show from early this Fall. Oliver was on a tear about "civil forfeiture" and the like. [ See on YouTube ]
This isn't something schools go out of their way to teach citizens, so in case you haven't seen this episode, let me explain. Basically, civil forfeiture allows the police or other government forces to seize money or property which they believe has been, will be or is being used in illegal activities. For instance, John Oliver told us about a driver who was pulled over by a policeman. When the policeman found the driver had over $2000 in cash in the car, he quickly realized that nobody ever carries that much money for legal purposes. Therefore, the policeman came to the only possible conclusion: the driver must have been driving to California to buy illegal drugs. Since that would be a criminal activity, the policeman, of course, confiscated the money.
John Oliver, being the rabble-rouser that he is, presented such actions by the police as over-reaching and maybe even corrupt. Oliver went further and informed us that the police can confiscate your money or property based on the premise there was / is / will be some illegal activity - and do not need to arrest you or present any evidence of illegal activity to a judge or jury. Oliver continued and told us there is no "innocent until proven guilty" in these matters. As a matter of fact, if you want your money or property back, you would have to present your case to prove you were innocent.
In his short-sightedness, John Oliver presented this as a violation of justice and an inherently wrong way for our government to operate. A more rounded view of these procedures is that we are talking about a legal tool. Tools can be used in good ways or bad ways. It's not the tool's fault.
But what possible good use could this have, you ask. I'm glad you brought up that point. Well, I think it's pretty obvious. It occurred to me while watching Oliver.
For six years, President Obama and the Democrats have been telling us that they'd really like to prosecute Wall Street and the bankers, but it's just SO hard to prove it in court that they were really knowingly acting in ways that were illegal. Thank you, John Oliver! Now President Obama and the Democrats know that all that silly nonsense about "innocent until proven guilty," arrests, criminal charges, judges, juries and the like just don't apply when it's obvious to most Americans that Wall Street is a bunch of crooks.
Since their crimes were committed in their corporate headquarters office buildings, the government can simply seize those buildings. Since the billions of dollars sitting in their accounts were, are or will be used for illegal activities, the government can confiscate that money. And since those executives took an active role in those crimes, all that money in their personal assets resulted from illegal activities. Not to mention their fancy cars, yachts, second (third and fourth) homes, etc. are all subject to civil forfeiture!
Clearly, civil forfeiture is a fine and honorable practice when implemented as it should be. In our democracy, where everyone is treated equally, and police who exceed their authority are always properly disciplined, I know that civil forfeiture will be applied in an unbiased manner and used in the manner I've described.
The Democrats, who side with regular Americans against big business, if they ever err in applying civil forfeiture, will err on the side of being over-zealous in seizing corporate assets while overlooking the average guy's activities. Of that, we can be sure.
I can hardly wait until Monday when the seizures, no doubt, will be announced to the public.