Eminent domain gives our government the power to commandeer private property for public use, as long as the property owner is properly compensated. As an example, we could bring up the Keystone Pipeline, which would possibly put the Fifth Amendment to use.

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

However, some elitists have taken advantage of the opportunity to turn the government into their own personal Frank Nitti, aiding in their ability to take out the little guy and build casinos, parking lots, malls, and various unnecessary developments sure to line their pockets. Conservatives have, historically, stood in opposition of such government approved theft.

Until now, apparently.

.@realDonaldTrump: I think eminent domain is wonderful – it's called economic development. #SpecialReport pic.twitter.com/m6LeoW2mmt

— Fox News (@FoxNews) October 6, 2015

Watch the interview below:

As Ed Morrissey pointed out, Trump is not simply supporting “road development,” he is supporting redistribution of property that benefits a higher social class; a level of thievery true conservatives are adamantly against. He’s talking about legally bullying the citizens of this country for the greater industrial good, almost as though he’s reading the idea from a Soviet Union poster. His admiration concerning the Kelo case is particularly disturbing:

Conservatives don’t oppose the use of eminent domain to build roads and other public facilities. The issue in Kelo, however, was that the government condemned the property because the owner wouldn’t sell it to another private entity. The city claimed that they had the right to use eminent domain to foster urban redevelopment of a blighted area, a concern which the Supreme Court ruled had precedence over private ownership of property. That’s generally the kind of authoritarian control over property rights that conservatives oppose. It’s redistributionism at its naked, raw worst, especially since in this case the city confiscated from the working class to give to the wealthy.

If you can ignore Trump's love of eminent domain, you probably wanna remove "conservative" from your bio.

— Michelle Ray (@GaltsGirl) October 7, 2015

https://twitter.com/kesgardner/status/651519861097562112

Notable @realdonaldTrump didn't point to takings clause to defend eminent domain as necessary evil. He said eminent domain is "wonderful."

— Stephen Hayes (@stephenfhayes) October 7, 2015

Trump's argument for eminent domain should scare the bajesus out of every property owner. #SpecialReport

— Cody Hall (@CodyHall09) October 6, 2015

So is this a new stance for Sir. Trump? No, Michelle Malkin warned of his history back in 2011 when he was flirting with a presidential campaign.

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.

Thankfully Coking’s property, a place she called “home” for three decades, was spared. However, his thug tactics in Atlantic City were not a one-time offense; no, he has attempted to use – and fully supports – this form of government thuggery in various situations.

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.

And about that Kelo case….

In Trump’s beloved Kelo case, you may recall, the thing called “economic development” didn’t actually lead to any, and the working-class homeowner really did love the house that was bulldozed by the government at the behest of a wealthy developer.

So is this finally going to be enough to make Trump fans jump off the bumpy bandwagon ride they’re desperately clinging to as it flees from the conservative camp?

If "conservative" radio/tv hosts were willing to cover for Trump's love of single payer, they'll also cover 4 his support of eminent domain.

— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) October 7, 2015

Doubt it. Unfortunately, his history of supporting liberal and socialist agenda driven policies, as well as the impossible tax ideas that serve as an antithetical move against their survival, has done very little to curb the appeal of “yuge walls” and deportation. Sadly, many have become one issue voters. We’ve entered the backwards world of impossibilities; more government control = conservatism, less revenue = more socialist programs, crony capitalism = strength of the people, and I’m just going to assume that 1+1=5.

UPDATE: Earlier this morning, Marco Rubio spoke out concerning Donald Trump’s love for eminent domain:

“He’s wrong,” Rubio told THE WEEKLY STANDARD following a campaign event at a tech company in New Hampshire. “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.”

Rubio is on point! Protecting the rights of the people should be our first concern, as opposed to allowing ivory tower elitists to use the government as a bully so they can demolish homes and have a place to park their limousines.