Having read the story from ZH, as written it certainly reads as a threat " .... ruin their career" but indirecly upon one or both of two Texas state senators ..... and the Sheriff declined to confirm his characterization of these comments ..... fuzzy enough to allow some wiggle room especially in light of the hyperbole ever present in Trump speak.
Amending law to only allow asset forfeiture after conviction slickens the slope if/when access to assets is what facilitates the inability to convict IE. drug dealers able to afford the really fancy, high rent lawyers. The flip side is, this change would protect falsely accused who otherwise have their lives stripped bare and rendered homeless at the mere mention of allegations and long before reaching a courtroom.
I found this poignant commentary way down the list of peanut gallery remarks--
" FrankDrakman Bruce Flea Feb 7, 2017 1:10 AM
May I presume to expand on that? Paying your taxes is not charity.
In days gone by, it was religious and social groups that provided charity. Sometimes, it was a bit of both - it was said at the Salvation Army, 'you got your meal and your prayer'. And while the people providing those meals and other services may have had different motivations (religion, altruism, enhanced self interest), they were all doing it voluntarily.
And these volunteers (V), by virtue of not being paid, showed the recipients (R) that V still recognized the people in R as humans who needed help, and not at all deplorable. And that made R sincerely grateful to V. I know that from experience.
I've been involved with people who've kept me sober almost 4 years. We meet Friday night at 8 pm, which is inconvenient, but people show up. I tell them how profoundly grateful I am, and mean it, that they were there for me at the beginning. I have learned it's my responsibility to be there for the next person. I donate money and time to the group, and do it gladly. Real charity is based on humility - the knowledge we are all imperfect to some degree.
When that humility is eliminated from the equation, we get the modern welfare state. Instead of humble V serving grateful R, we have case workers serving an ever growing horde demanding various and expensive rights. Those rights require taxes, which are grudgingly paid.
So by systematizing welfare, we have reduced the interaction of the vast non-R majority with R to a deduction from their pay cheque - money earned but immediately taken, so never missed. There is no sacrifice of time or money, no personal mixing of R/non-R, and none of virtues of the R/V model. And, just as the military uses all events to grow, so does the welfare industry. The huge increase in Americans on disability during the Bush/Obama years is staggering.
This helps create the Red/Blue divide. Out in flyover country, people know who their neighbours are, and who deserves help, and who's just a rat. In the anonymous coastal cities, no one knows you eat at SNAP's. To the non-R, welfare is not a personal obligation, but an expense to be trimmed. To R, welfare is no longer a gift of grace, but an inalienable right. The ability of liberal democracy to destroy itself from within is frightening to watch. "