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.
America, it’s time you wised up to Donald Trump’s property-redistribution racket, too.
Advertisement
Trump has been wooing conservative activists for months and flirting with a GOP presidential run — first at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington and most recently at a tea-party event in South Florida. He touts his business experience, “high aptitude,” and “bragadocious” deal-making abilities. But he’s no more a standard bearer of conservative values, limited government, and constitutional principles than the cast of Jersey Shore.
Too many mega-developers like Trump have achieved success by using and abusing the government’s ability to commandeer private property for purported “public use.” Invoking the Fifth Amendment takings clause, real-estate moguls, parking-garage builders, mall developers, and sports-palace architects have colluded with elected officials to pull off legalized theft in the name of reducing “blight.” Under eminent domain, the definition of “public purpose” has been stretched like Silly Putty to cover everything from roads and bridges to high-end retail stores, baseball stadiums, and casinos.
While casting himself as America’s new constitutional savior, Trump has shown reckless disregard for fundamental private-property rights. In the 1990s, he waged a notorious war on elderly homeowner Vera Coking, who owned a little home in Atlantic City that stood in the way of Trump’s manifest land development. The real-estate mogul was determined to expand his Trump Plaza and build a limousine parking lot — Coking’s private property be damned. The nonprofit Institute for Justice, which successfully saved Coking’s home, explained the confiscatory scheme:
Unlike most developers, Donald Trump doesn’t have to negotiate with a private owner when he wants to buy a piece of property, because a governmental agency — the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority or CRDA — will get it for him at a fraction of the market value, even if the current owner refuses to sell. Here is how the process works.
After a developer identifies the parcels of land he wants to acquire and a city planning board approves a casino project, CRDA attempts to confiscate these properties using a process called “eminent domain,” which allows the government to condemn properties “for public use.” Increasingly, though, CRDA and other government entities exercise the power of eminent domain to take property from one private person and give it to another. At the same time, governments give less and less consideration to the necessity of taking property and also ignore the personal loss to the individuals being evicted.
Trump has attempted to use the same tactics in Connecticut and has championed the reviled Kelo v. City of New London Supreme Court ruling upholding expansive use of eminent domain. He told Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto that he agreed with the ruling “100 percent” and defended the chilling power of government to kick people out of their homes and businesses based on arbitrary determinations:
The fact is, if you have a person living in an area that’s not even necessarily a good area, and government, whether it’s local or whatever, government wants to build a tremendous economic development, where a lot of people are going to be put to work and make [an] area that’s not good into a good area, and move the person that’s living there into a better place — now, I know it might not be their choice — but move the person to a better place and yet create thousands upon thousands of jobs and beautification and lots of other things, I think it happens to be good.
Like most statist promises of bountiful job creation, government-engineered redevelopment math rarely adds up. Trump’s corporations have backed casino-industry bailouts and wealth-redistributing “tax-increment financing” schemes — the very kind of taxpayer-subsidized interventions we’ve seen on a grand scale under the Obama administration.
Championing liberty begins at the local level. There is nothing more fundamental than the principle that a man’s home is his castle. Donald Trump’s career-long willingness to trample this right tells you everything you need to know about his bogus tea-party sideshow.
This new collectivist interpretation of Eminent Domain is the sort of thing we used to hear about only in China, where the government can run roughshod over an individual's property rights. Apparently Mr. Slumlord Trump is perfectly comfortable with that Shanghai development mentality. I really hope the GOP is not fooled by him.
WOW! Another "establishment" conservative commentator goes after Donald!
So, Michelle Malkin has joined the "Brandy-sipping" crowd? Shall we place bets as to where, this Summer, Ms. Malkin will be sailing her yacht?
Or, can the Buchanan brigade get over its lopsided support for a "populist" liberal, pop-culture billionaire real estate mogul with 1/2 as many wives as Henry VIII?
But let's see if they take their pitchforks to Ms. Malkin. My money is on "YES, INDEED THEY WILL".
Attack Obama on his birth certificate; get snippy with Snuffaluffagus, and you're a "serious" candidate for the most powerful office in the Western Hemisphere.
Attack Trump on his liberalism, his impetuousness and his overall lack of anything remotely approaching class, and one is an "establishment elitist".
It is all too apparent that these people who decry "elitism" are just as - if not more so - over the edge with their "ordinary" sense of themselves.
Evidently, Budweiser from a tin can - as much as Brandy from a sifter - can go to one's head.
Personally, I prefer Jack Daniels #7. I guess that makes me - what? - a moderate? :)
I think it's sad that the Trump is the only one who is out there attacking the 0bama and therefore the only one the public sees.
Where are the other contenders? Trying not to step on toes like McCain?
Good post though Michelle. I like Trumps attack style but don't trust him any farther than I can throw his tower.
For the past week or two, there have been a plethora of comment threads here asserting that the critics of Trump are elitist.
In fact, the contributors to NR and NRO were singled out as "Brandy sippers". And one of the main tropes was that all the criticism to Trump was personal, not issue-oriented.
They stayed away from Michelle, because - well - that garbage would not play well against a blogger who recently joined NRO's ranks.
If you missed that entire discussion, c'est la vie. Ditto if you were being sarcastic.
That hardly makes me a moderate. If you've ever read my posts, I'm inclined to go with "sarcasm".
You may wish to search the NRO database for "Daniel Foster", "Katrina Trinko", "Rich Lowry", "Ramesh Ponuru", etc. Then, read the comments to their Corner Posts and Home Page articles concerning Trump's candidacy.
Honestly, I have more respect for the street criminal who sticks a gun or knife in your face and demands your wallet than I do for the eminent domain thieves. For one thing, the street thug is generally poorer than the people he is robbing. (Not an excuse or justification, but it does provide an explanation). Two, the street thug at least has the courage to confront his victims face to face, and run the risk of violence that entails. And, three, at least the street criminal is honest about his motives; as he's pointing his pistol at you and relieving you of your property, he doesn't have the chutzpah to try to convince you that somehow this is for your own good, or that he is performing some type of public service.
These eminent domain thieves, on the other hand, are rich guys who hide behind an army of lawyers and use the armed enforcement authority of the government (against which resistance is futile) to steal from poor people and further enrich themselves. And then they claim it is for the "public good." So they add cowardice and mendacity to their avarice and greed.
Lower than whale droppings, these eminent domain thieves (and their government partners in crime) are.
Madisonian
I guess you didn't understand what people like me were criticizing on the other threads about Trump. So I'll be happy to explain...no true conservative would ever consider Michelle Malkin an elitist and her column actually proves our point. She doesn't call names and denigrate his candidacy as unserious. In fact, she points out the very serious threat his leadership would pose to private property rights. Go after Trumps political views and attack his attempt to reinvent himself as a conservative.
Thank you, Michelle. Anyone who would willingly take someone else's property is not worthy of the presidency. I have enjoyed Trump going after Obama because someone needs to, but that's always been as far as I would want him to go. Bless you, Michelle, and your cousin.
I don't think Donald Trump has positioned himself as a constitutional champion. I think that is a mischaracterization of his message to the tea party and to CPAC. You are purposefully mischaracterizing his message Mrs. Malkin. He's not trying to trick anybody and the tea partiers are not misinformed about him. They see him as a man that gets results and a successful businessman that employs all told about 22,000 people. They see a man who is unapologetic for being an American and affirming that America is the greatest country on the face of the earth by God' grace. They see a man who rightly points out America's enemies and those who are ripping us off. They see a man that points out who is truly suffering in America thanks to these "wonderful" "free trade" deals. They see a man pointing out America's resources and strengths that our leadership on both sides refuse to use because they rather want to argue over ideology and ignore the problems middle America face that are further exacerbated with rising fuel cost and ricing prices of basic neccessities.
None of the other would be candidiates are stepping up and acting like they want the job. They are seemingly timid in wanting to attack whats going on in this country with Obama and past leaders we have had in this country. The tea party wants results, not ideological battles that cause gridlock to the detriment of fixing the myriad problems in this country. They want their govenment back. I seem to recall from US history the former BANKRUPT President Abraham Lincoln say "...government for the people." That is what the tea partiers want.
It's time to put America first, not ideology. That is what Trump represents in his message to tea partiers and to CPAC. Champion or not all presidents swear to uphold and defend the constitution. How well has that gone on in our history? What ideologically pure candidate do you have in mind, Mrs. Malkin? I also find it interesting that NOW you are so concerned about eminent domain being that you are a Jersey Girl. Unless you can prove that you have written extensively about it before Trump came onto the scene expressing interest in the GOP nomination for president, I find your concern artificial and this article a hit piece and futher proof for an utter disregard for Reagan's championing of the "11th commandment" toward fellow Republicans by you and others in the GOP establishment.
As always, you hit the nail on the head with a resousing bang.
I vividly remember the Vera Coking confrontation, and have looked upon Trump with disdain ever since.
(As a side note, the Coking case sparked the movie "Up!" )
Trump is basically what we used to see out of the Democratic party: pro-American politicians who strongly believed in domestic government intervention when they saw fit.
The guy is a sleazy business man, but it's refreshing to see a national figure who actually brags about his love of our country. That's the only reason he sparks interest in the population of every day Americans.
But as always, excellent memory (and research) Michelle!
