523: When They Come For You by David Kirby

This show is produced by the Hartman Media Company.

For more information and links to all.

Our great podcasts, visit hartmanmedia.com.

Welcome to the Holistic Survival show with Jason Hartman. The economic storm brewing around the world is set to spill into all aspects of our lives. Are you prepared? Where are you going to turn for the critical life skills necessary to survive and prosper? The Holistic Survival show is your family's insurance for a better life. Jason will teach you to think independently, to understand threats and how to create the ultimate action plan. Sudden change or worst case scenario, you'll be ready. Welcome to Holistic Survival, your key resource for protecting the people, places and profits you care about in uncertain times. Ladies and gentlemen, your host, Jason Hartman.

It's a pleasure to welcome David Kirby. He's the author of several book and his newest one is entitled When They Come for How Police and Government are Trampling Our Liberties and How to Take Them Back. I think as financially interested listeners, many of you will be especially interested when we talk about debtors prisons. It's not what you think. It's not like in the old days. Debtors prisons, the modern version of them. David, how you doing? Welcome.

Very good, thank you and glad to be on your show.

Where are you located?

I live in New York City.

Fantastic. So I have referred to police and I don't mean anything against individual police, but just the concept of police. They've become like the modern day tax collectors. It's profitable for police departments to basically collect fees from people and get them into this system that is this terrible downward spiral of debt enslavement, isn't it? Tell us about that if you would.

Sure. And we do have debtors prisons. Again, there are people, I would say thousands of people right this minute locked up. Not because they refused or wouldn't, because they simply couldn't. They did not have the money. And what happens is they get sentenced to jail until they come up with the money. And of course in jail you can't work, so there's no way you can come up with the money. And then they start racking up interest on you and people have been a year, even two years in prison in jail over what originally started as a traffic violation.

Unbelievable. You know, we are really becoming, as the conspiracy theorist Alex Jones would have said, a prison planet or at least a prison country. I mean it is just ridiculous how so many things have become criminalized. Like on the debtor's prison concept, I would love to blame the privatization of the prison business and I'm calling it a Business very specifically. But can you, in this case, because those debtors can't pay the bills to the system. I mean, are the taxpayers footing the bill for that or what? Any relationship there you want to talk about?

Well, it costs a lot of money to incarcerate a prisoner, whether it's a state run or a private prison. So to the extent that more people are going to prison or jail, I should say, over these unpaid debts, some of them, I imagine, are ending up in private prisons. So it is a profit for them. But what really happens in this case is the privatization of probation. And there are companies out there that contract with local jurisdictions to manage each case, to manage the probation and to try to get the money out of these people. They have to report to their private probation officer regularly. They have to turn over as much money as they can and they have to pay for that company to manage their case.

So these are probation. I had no idea that was privatized. So these private probation companies. So if someone goes on probation for not paying a traffic ticket or not paying child support or alimony or, you know, whatever, how much does it cost to go on probation? I mean, this is insanity. You know, they can't pay their debt in the first place and then they put them in more debt.

Yeah, I'd have to go back and look at the cases I wrote about. It wasn't a lot, but these people had no money at all. So even if it's, you know, 100 bucks a month, that's a real hardship.

Well, you know, for normal working people. Right, Working class people, you can see how insane this is. My former home state of California that is just desperate for money has just massively increased the cost of traffic tickets. I remember talking to a taxi driver in Newport Beach, California, where I used to live, saying that he got a speeding ticket and it was like one fine later, you know, because he paid it late, he couldn't pay it, and basically it became a thousand dollar ticket, he said. And you know, for normal people, they can't afford this. I remember when my mother dropped me off at LAX in my car, okay. She took my car while, you know, after dropping me off at the airport and borrowed it while I was on vacation. And, you know, it didn't have a front license plate. So she got a ticket driving my car. Okay? And you know who's to blame for that? Is it me because it's my car or is it her because she happened to be driving it? Right. So both people, both parties are accountable now. And that ticket, it was like, $200. And while my mom and I were debating who has to pay the fine, which I ended up paying it, of course, but, you know, we were just so disgusted about the whole thing, it turned into a $600 ticket. I mean, unbelievable. This is just.

Yeah. And, you know, the Sixth Amendment does have the excessive fines clause. It prohibits fines that are disproportional to the offense. And I think $600 for a license plate is not proportional.

In many states, it's not even required to have a front license plate. But if you want it, if you want to raise more revenue, just make more laws, because then more people will break them. So, you know, you'll raise more revenue. So that's a good tax. It's good income planning for governments.

Yes. But, you know, in the case of debtors prisons, not only do we pay. I think it's 50, $80 a night per inmate, we the taxpayers. But oftentimes these are single parents. And then those kids then have to go into foster care, which costs a whole bunch more, and it's tearing apart a family. And, you know, this is tragic.

This is tragic. Okay, so tell us where some of these problems originate from. We talked about traffic tickets. I mentioned child support and alimony. I know that. Child support. And that's mostly an attack on men, of course. And, you know, they call them deadbeat dads, but it's not always that way. Sometimes it's deadbeat moms. Okay, it's not always that way, but mostly it is that way just because most courts rule in favor of the mother. She gets the kids, and that means the dad has to pay the child support. So I was surprised, though, to hear that people go to jail for not paying alimony.

Yes, they do. Yes, they do. And it's not because they refuse to pay. It's because they cannot pay. I saw some amazing cases where the men were paying as much as $300,000 a year, or that's what they were supposed to pay, and they lost their job, you know, and they couldn't. You. He simply could not pay it.

Well, doesn't it. Isn't it indexed based on one's income?

Well, yes, it is, but like you said, some judges award excessive alimony, and sometimes they award more than the person can pay. And in this case, he lost his job, so he was no longer able to pay.

So we really do have debtors prisons again. Anything else? I mean, are they putting people in jail for not paying their student loans yet? It's probably coming.

I don't Think so. But I don't know what happens to those people, quite honestly. I know they have a lot of civil issues to deal with.

Yeah, you can't bankrupt out of student loans, which is just crazy that that debt is somehow different. They get people when they're unaware of how the system works. They're young, they don't know any better. They might get their parents or grandparents to co sign. And we profiled stories on the show about how their houses are foreclosed because, you know, the kid couldn't pay the student loan debt. But also I have heard that there are some instances where when someone doesn't repay their student loan debt, they could lose a professional license. So for example, if they went to school and got a teaching credential or a psychology credential as a psychologist, their license could be suspended if they weren't paying their student loan debt. So not jail, but taking away their ability to earn income. It's just a vicious cycle.

This seems like completely counterproductive and it doesn't help society at all and it doesn't help them and their families. I think one other issue that I'm sure would be of interest to your listeners is civil asset forfeiture. Yes, and I hope we can talk about that somewhat too, because it's a really big issue.

Let's dive into that one. So you know, we've heard about, you know, the cases in the news where someone's got a joint of marijuana and they lose their car, their boat, their house. You know, now the laws with marijuana are obviously loosening quite a bit. But tell us about civil asset forfeiture and where it applies and where these egregious actions are.

Sure. We actually have a two track system in this country. There's criminal asset forfeiture and civil asset forfeiture. Criminal asset forfeiture is, for example, Paul Manafort, he was convicted of felonies that included getting ill begotten from funds and assets. So under the criminal statute, he lost his houses, his money, his Armani suits, etc. Etc. But that was connected directly to a crime for which he was prosecuted and convicted. In civil asset forfeiture, there are no charges filed against the individual. Now if you're caught with drugs in your car, yeah, that's crime. And you'll get arrested and you'll get prosecuted and you may be subject to criminal asset forfeiture. Let's say you have cash with you too. And they could say, well, that's drug money. But if you get stopped and somehow searched and they find Cash. Even if they just suspect it's drug money or some kind of ill begotten revenue, they take it.

I've read stories about that kind of thing. Yeah, like in other words, no crime was being committed. The cops just find it suspicious that someone would have $3,000 in their wallet or something like that, right? Is that what you're saying?

That is exactly what I'm saying. There was one guy who was a refugee from Burma, from a Catholic tribe of Burmese who are oppressed there. And he was driving around the United States with a ban, raising money for some Catholic charities back in Myanmar. And he was on his way home after his tour. He had $56,000 cash in the car. And they took it. This happens a lot, but they take property, too. I wrote about a motel owner in Massachusetts and they came and they seized his motel, which had been open for maybe 30, 40 years, rented out hundreds of thousands of rooms during that time. And there had been 15 drug arrests on his property. 15.

And they said for that reason he was culpable and liable. And they moved to take his motel, which it had been paid in full, was worth about 1.3 million at the time. They seized it and he had to fight to get it back. He finally did. The judge found it was something called the innocent owner clause. If you could prove you had nothing to do with a crime committed on your property, nor even knowledge or even any way of knowing, because you can't just walk into a motel room. If you're the owner of the motel, then you are not responsible.

Right. But notice the words you just said, and I don't know if they were intentional or not. If you can prove the whole point of our system is that you're innocent until proven guilty, the government, it's the government's burden to prove that. That you're guilty. You're not your burden to prove that you're innocent.

That's why civil asset forfeiture is so torturous. And most people just walk away because, I mean, not in a $1.2 million, but if it's $6,000, the lawyer is going to want $10,000 to represent you. And sometimes the cops will say, okay, we'll keep three and we'll give you three back.

Yeah, they all basically bargain you out of your own money.

Yep. And most people take that too. And then when it does go to trial, it's not the government against you. There are literally cases like United States of America versus $4,650 cash, or City of Boston versus 123 Maple street and I have several stories of people who had their houses confiscated. They were literally thrown out on the street, windows boarded up. City took this in Philadelphia, took over the houses. In one case, one of the sons was suspected of selling marijuana, even though he was doing it out in the street. And the other case, their son was doing heroin. It's not clear if he was selling it or not, but in both cases, they came and took away the houses.

Right. So the property owner is responsible for the occupants, like in this hotel example.

You gave, according to the government. But the judge in that case didn't buy it. And those two cases I mentioned were also overturned. And the people got their money back, their houses back, eventually. But after, you know, a being kicked out of your house, you know, sleeping on the couch of a relative, racking up legal fees, fighting like hell to.

Get your house back, fighting the government. I mean, can you imagine having to fight the government? They've got virtually unlimited resources. The government's lawyers want to get ahead in their career and get a promotion. You know, a lot of times they don't care about justice. They just want to. Every time they nail someone, they put a notch on their bedpost, as it were. Right. Something for their resume that is just. Absolutely.

And they're bringing, you know, most of that. In most cases, that revenue goes right back into the police department. Now, you mentioned the resources that they have to prosecute people and keep the assets that were seized. What also goes on is local law enforcement basically outsources to the feds, and the DOJ will come in, do the investigation, do the prosecution basically take over with the unlimited resources they have. And when the forfeiture is complete, the feds keep 20% and give 80% back to the local jurisdiction.

It's like a business deal. I mean, that's just unbelievable. The government should not be in business. That's like a business deal that I would strike with someone, but I don't have the power to, you know, ruin people's lives. It's just incredible. How did we get here? How did we get here and what do we do about it? That's one of the things your book talks about, is what to do about it.

Sure. One other thing I just want to mention, because I think in particular to business owners, small business owners out there is something called structuring laws. And what that refers to is people who do a large cash business and make deposits periodically in their bank accounts. Now, if you deposit more than $10,000, that automatically gets reported to the government. I wrote an article, a story about a woman who owned a Mexican restaurant in Iowa. It was a cash only business, and she would deposit $6,000 one day. A couple days later, she would deposit $9,200. But she had repeated deposits under $10,000, and they seized it. The IRS came in and took it and charged her with this structuring deposit, basically trying to get around the law when that was not the case at all. She had nothing to hide. She was a completely honest businesswoman, and she went through hell to get that back. So banks are not obligated to tell you this, that if you keep depositing just under $10,000, the feds are going to come knocking on your door.

That could be just totally innocent. That's just.

Yeah, of course.

Wow.

I mean, a lot of people do still deal in cash, believe it or not.

Yeah, sure they do.

So here's what I write about in my book about what can be done about this particular problem. And then we haven't even gone into the whole array of everything that I cover. But in terms of asset forfeiture, one is this flow of money. Nobody really keeps track of it. There's no accounting, there's no auditing. So we don't really always know the local police department. Well, how many seizures did they make? How much was forfeited? What was the worth? What became of that money? Where was it spent? There's no monitoring. There's no tracking in most cases, and that is really important. I think the most important thing is to just end this cash incentive. In 43 states, the cops get to keep between 45 and 100% of what they take.

It's as if these officers and district attorneys are basically like they're fundraisers.

That's exactly what they are. It doesn't go into their pocket.

No, not directly, but it goes into their career. It helps their career, right?

Absolutely. It's a feather in your cap. Wow. And sometimes they compensate cars, and you then convert them into patrol cars. You know, if you brought that car in, the chief's gonna be very happy with you. You're probably gonna get that appointment or that law enforcement conference in Puerto Rico or whatever other perks they have to help out. It helps pay for overtime. And some people. I didn't find proof of this. There may be bonuses involved.

Why don't they just put them on straight commission? You know, this is just unbelievable. You know, put them on commission, they'll earn even more, they'll raise more money. That's just super.

But if you just Eliminate that incentive in states where that has happened is this problem has decreased dramatically. It's just not that many states have done it, but just take and put it into the general fund or put it into the Education department. Yeah, yeah, that's revenue for the state, even though it shouldn't in many cases even be seized. But they would be less likely to seize the money if they knew that they weren't going to see a dime of it.

Right. Then it would be, you know, a truly impartial thing. They'd actually be seizing money for justice. I mean, there are certainly criminals out there and we should take their stuff. The people, if you will, should benefit from taking the criminals ill gotten gains. You know, I'm all for it. But you know, what you consider a quote, unquote crime needs to be considered because a lot of these things really aren't crimes. That's the first problem. And the second problem is the misaligned incentives. So what do we do about it? I mean, I see that if you eliminate this stuff, but how does anybody listening influence any of this? What can they do about it? On a personal level?

Boy, on a personal level, you know, if they come after you, first of all, if this does happen to you, there's a wonderful organization called the Institute for justice. That's ij.org they helped me tremendously. A lot of the stories I told were cases that they handled. They do handle cases pro bono. It's one of the biggest things they do. There are other groups out there that can help you personally. But on the larger level there are laws. Two states have actually eliminated civil asset forfeiture entirely.

Which states?

The Nebraska and New Mexico.

Okay, interesting.

Fifteen states now require a criminal conviction before any assets can be seen. You actually have to go through the whole process.

That's good.

That makes the most sense, right?

That makes sense. It does.

Let's have a one track system, not a two track system. And the only people who lose their assets are those who are actually convicted of a crime that could be shown that was related to the crime, that those assets were gained through criminal activity. I would end equitable sharing. This sharing of 8020 with the federal government. That only makes the matter worse. And these structuring laws that prosecute people for depositing less than $10,000 at a time. And then there is something in Congress called the FAIR Act. I believe Rand Paul is the main sponsor of that. And it would establish a lot of reforms and give property owners a lot more rights and make it much easier for them to get their property back. But it's gone absolutely nowhere in Congress. The Bush administration is very in favor of this procedure, as was the Obama administration. They enacted a few sort of feeble reforms, but they didn't have that much of an impact. Donald Trump famously said he met with a bunch of Texas sheriffs in the Oval Office and they were talking about civil asset forfeiture and that there was a lawmaker who wanted to eliminate it and only have criminal asset forfeiture. And Trump, you know, half jokingly said, who is it? Who's his name? I want his name. We'll ruin his career. So that's the kind of message coming out of the White House about this issue. So you know that not many, at least Republican senators are going to take this up.

Yeah, well, that's something. Well, give out your website, tell people where they can find out more. This is really scary stuff. You know, in, in the criminal example that you just used, the forfeiture can happen before. Well, without any criminal conviction as forfeiture.

Is the first thing that happens.

Exactly. So it eliminates the right for that person to defend themselves properly. They might be a successful person that has the money to hire attorneys, but their assets have been seized and so they're stuck with a public defender now.

I mean, well, actually they're not.

Okay, tell us about that.

In criminal forfeiture cases have more rights than, than non criminals. In the civil cases, because you are not charged with a crime, you are not eligible for court appointed counsel. So just think about that. And in the case of that restaurant owner I mentioned, they seized $33,000. The IRS did. She went to private attorneys and they said it's going to cost you more than that to get it back. And fortunately the Institute for Justice took her case and they prevailed. But yeah, I mean, you don't have right to legal counsel in these cases.

It's just like in a business deal. That's why the system just does not work. You know, if someone takes advantage of you in business, you got to take them to court. And I think there are a group of crooked business people out there, you know, like a whole genre of them that sort of knows how much to rip people off. And basically what they do is they figured out that if you only rip people off a certain amount, it will never be worth suing them. So either people have to band together as a class or they just have to get a regulatory agency to hold them in check or they have to have the unfortunate for the crooks experience of doing with someone who's just principled and has the resources and who's going to hold them accountable either way, even if it doesn't make sense? It's a crazy world we live in. Okay, did you go out your website yet?

Not yet. It's David KirbyAuthor.com and I just want to say we only talked about two chapters in a ten chapter book and we discussed financial stuff, which is great, but there is a lot more there.

Just give us a little tease on.

The rest and we'll let you go military style. Raids on private homeowners.

Child Protective Services that take away your kid in the middle of the night without a warrant, without due process, they're gone. And it can take one family. Took them four years to get their little girl back. And the agency falsified records and withheld exonerating evidence because the people at Child.

Protective Services want to make their career look good too. They got to be doing something right.

And they bring in more money to the system. The more kids you're managing, the more money the state has to get you.

Ah, yes, more misaligned incentives.

And the federal government pays the state money for every child put into foster care or adoption. And there's actually a menu depending on the age or whether they have a disability. And the federal government pays the state that money. So there's all kinds of incentives.

Tragic misalignment of incentives. Yeah, yeah.

And then lots of free speech violations. Freedom of the press, freedom of protesters spying on Americans, things like planting evidence, forced confessions, Judges who are in cahoots with private jails, sending innocent people to prison for profit. It goes on and on. Yeah, I shouldn't laugh, but.

No, it's just. Scratch the surface. Yeah, I know. You've almost got it to relieve some of the tension. This stuff will just get you so worked up. David, I thank you so much for bringing this to our attention. Everybody should get this book. These are really important topics. And you know, a lot of people are thinking, well, this only happens to somebody else, but eventually it could happen to you. Okay? So you better become aware of the problem and some of the probably weak but available defenses you have about the problem. Because you just never know when you or someone you care about will be a victim of this type of thing. David, thanks for joining us.

Thank you, Jason. I really appreciate it.

Thank you so much for listening. Please be sure to subscribe so that you don't miss any episodes. Be sure to check out the show's specific website and our general website, hartmanmedia.com for appropriate disclaimers and terms of service. Remember that guest opinions are their own and if you require specific legal or tax advice or advice in any other specialized area, please consult an appointment appropriate professional and we also very much appreciate you reviewing the show. Please go to iTunes or Stitcher Radio or whatever platform you're using and write a review for the show. We would very much appreciate that and be sure to make it official and subscribe so you do not miss any episodes. We look forward to seeing you on the next episode.