Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Sanctuary State CA To Lose ALL Federal Funding?


Recommended Posts

Sanctuary State To Lose ALL Federal Funding – They Said This Would NEVER Happen

One wonders just how far the state of California is willing to continue to push the envelope for illegal immigration? Just how much is pandering to illegal aliens worth?

The Department of Justice just issued a second and final warning to the state California sternly letting its Democrat Governor, Jerry Brown, state leadership, and the citizenry were given an ultimatum – you can be a sanctuary state that flouts federal immigration law or you can keep the federal tax dollars flowing … but you cannot have both.

Fox News reports

“Earlier this month, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a so-called “sanctuary state” bill which basically erects a wall between California law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement officers. The bill forbids California cops from providing release and other information that isn’t publicly available in response to a request for notification from federal law enforcement.

https://rwnofficial.com/sanctuary-state-federal-funding/

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks bigwave...This type of nonsense has escalated far enough...There's a point at which this entire event becomes malice to the security of the nation as a whole...Federal troops, Marshalls and the National Guard should be up graded to active status and on alert...Treason indictment should be filed and suponas to confine all associated oppatives for an indefinite period of time, until criminal charges can be administered...There needs to be examples made...they can get everyone's extension first by hanging John Kerry...jmho

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take the money they give to Ca and build a wall around it. Brown wants to play games and then scream for aid when a disaster hits.

Why do you think people are leaving when they can?

Background checks on ammo.

Mag capacity limits.

Ar style rifles limited ownership.

The list could go on and on. 

Until the legislature in Ca stops restricting the rights of the citizens people will leave. 

When illegals are treated better than citizens something is going to break.

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bostonangler said:

It don't think the government will cut California... If they decided to strike back it would be a big hit to our economy, seeing how they rank 6th in the world.

 

 

CA%20world%20GDP%20rankings.JPG

 

 

B/A

And....

 

If they ran it like a business instead of giving $160B a year to illegal's, not controlling the retirement system, etc., CA could easily take the #4 spot and in no time at all over take Germany for 4th place.

 

Our roads SUCK out here, the overpasses are terrible, the bureaucracy  is out of control. 

 

Heck to get a 2017 Chevy 1500 licensed is 1495.

 

If moving was easy I would be way the heck out of here.

 

A RV above a dime will make it easier.

 

BTW one good thing I see around here again is new building.

 

Thank God.

 

Peace,

 

Come on RV.

 

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

Cali is broke........they can't leverage anything.........fact is......we/tax payers/the USG..... will have to bail them out.....broke-bankrupt Cali.......

 

And according to the Constitution..........they can't get up and leave the Union either.........CL

 

that's sad just like our government now with 20 TRILLION in debt... What a bunch of maroons... And yet Americans keep voting for the two parties... I guess the joke's on us. Well those who choose to march with the two crooked parties...

 

B/A

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any money that we give them goes right into pensions corruption and lobbying anyways. It's a big slush fund. Then after putting no money into infrastructure they wait in till it gets so bad there's an emergency. A dam brakes, bridges crumble, fires ravage, then they cry and want money from Daddy or just raise taxes.They raise taxes for the roads, the roads don't get fixed, they raise taxes again, the roads don't get fixed. It's a all pay to play, we get way overcharged and the the money and kickbacks go under the table. You really think letting the boarder open is about bleeding hearts feeling  sorry for the poor children. Naaaaaa,  it's more pay to play. Big corporations paying off government so they can have cheap labor. Who does it hurt, the public. Their number one priority. Keep Americans safe, keeping the money train rolling is more important. But my fellow Californians  think it's ok and just ask, pass the vasoline please. Can't afford that either. 

Edited by jg1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jg1 said:

Any money that we give them goes right into pensions corruption and lobbying anyways. It's a big slush fund. Then after putting no money into infrastructure they wait in till it gets so bad there's an emergency. A dam brakes, bridges crumble, fires ravage, then they cry and want money from Daddy or just raise taxes.They raise taxes for the roads, the roads don't get fixed, they raise taxes again, the roads don't get fixed. It's a lil pay to play, we get way overcharged and the the money and kickbacks go under the table. You really think letting the boarder open is about bleeding heats feeling  sorry for the poor children. Naaaaaa,  it's more pay to play. Big corporations paying off government so they can have cheap labor. Who does it hurt, the public. Their number one priority. Keep Americans safe, keeping the money train rolling is more important. But my fellow Californians  think it's ok and just ask, pass the vasoline please. Can't afford that either. 

 

Everything you said is going on in every state across America and within our federal government.... Join the revolution and stop voting for the two parties... Stand up and don't take it any more. Sure it may take a while, but a new party will emerge... And the two crooked parties will see they are losing... JMHO

 

B/A

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bostonangler said:

 

Everything you said is going on in every state across America and within our federal government.... Join the revolution and stop voting for the two parties... Stand up and don't take it any more. Sure it may take a while, but a new party will emerge... And the two crooked parties will see they are losing... JMHO

 

B/A

"JOIN THE REVOLUTION"  I think Trump was the revolution....as was Bernie.....but he got screwed by the left.......Trump certainly is against the establishment....did you just tell us you voted for Trump?

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, coorslite21 said:

"JOIN THE REVOLUTION"  I think Trump was the revolution....as was Bernie.....but he got screwed by the left.......Trump certainly is against the establishment....did you just tell us you voted for Trump?

 

You are joking I can tell... Trump has filled the swamp, not drained it. And you know by my many postings I would not vote for either party...

I know I will be bashed, but here is what the Christian Science Monitor has to say.

 

 

Is Trump draining the swamp – or is the water rising?

Donald Trump first uttered the rallying cry “drain the swamp!” just three weeks before the 2016 election. Promising to “make our government honest once again,” Candidate Trump unveiled a five-point proposal aimed at reining in the influence of lobbyists.

“Drain the swamp!” quickly became one of Mr. Trump's central campaign promises – and one of the most popular chants at his rallies.

Today, experts on government ethics say, President Trump is presiding over one of the most ethically challenged administrations in modern history, especially this early on. Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, is only the latest example of a cabinet member operating under a storm cloud. Most recently, Mr. Pruitt has been accused of an improper housing set-up connected to an energy lobbyist, unconventional pay raises to favored political appointees, and reassignment or demotion of senior staff who questioned his spending. His job reportedly hangs in the balance, amid mixed signals from Trump and his spokespeople.

 

Other Trump cabinet members have already gotten the heave-ho, after questionable spending came to light. Former Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin, fired last week, had faced criticism over travel expenses for a trip to Europe, including airfare for his wife, which he says he repaid. Mr. Shulkin, who had also served as an under secretary in the Obama administration, maintains he was let go because he resisted pressure from the Trump White House to privatize veterans’ health care. 

All presidents deal to some extent with alleged wrongdoing by senior appointees, but “I have never seen anything like this,” says Scott Amey, general counsel for the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan government watchdog group.

 
Why is this happening, especially under an outsider president who swooped into Washington promising to change the way the capital operates?

One answer may center on what, exactly, Trump meant by “drain the swamp.”

Focus on deregulation

“We thought he was saying, ‘Hey, there’s going to be a new sheriff in town,’ and that he would do things differently with the revolving door [between government service and lobbying] and cleaning up ethics laws and regulations,” says Mr. Amey.

But so far, draining the swamp has been more about deregulation and shrinking the federal workforce, and less about strengthening or even adhering to the norms and rules of ethical behavior for government officials. Trump’s attacks on the media and on entrenched members of Congress – of both parties – have also tended to label them as members of the “swamp.”

 

Of the proposals in Trump’s original five-point plan, only one is fully in place: an executive order barring executive branch officials from lobbying for foreign governments or parties after they leave the administration.

The president’s own behavior has been important in setting the tone for his team, political analysts say.

Trump has yet to release his tax returns, defying the customary practice of modern presidents. He faces multiple lawsuits over his businesses and whether the income he derives from them violates the Constitution’s emoluments clause, which forbids the receipt of gifts from foreign countries. A federal judge ruled last week that one of the lawsuits can proceed. Trump’s business dealings are also under scrutiny as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and whether the president colluded with the Russians or engaged in obstruction of justice.

 

Besides Pruitt and Shulkin, multiple Trump cabinet secretaries have found themselves in hot water: Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin have all faced questions about their use of taxpayer money. In addition, Trump’s first secretary of Health and Human Services, Tom Price, was fired after just seven months on the job, following reports that he had spent $1 million in federal funds on private jet travel.

Not that members of the federal bureaucracy are above reproach. Former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe was fired last month after the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility found he had leaked to the media and “lacked candor” under oath, charges he denies.

Question of experience

But the swarm of ethics allegations facing Trump’s team is unusual. It may well reflect the fact that Trump is new to public service and came into office under his own ethical cloud, says Mickey Edwards, a Republican from Oklahoma who served in Congress from 1977 to 1993, including a stint in the leadership.

 

“I think some of [Trump’s appointees] came in with a sense of, ‘We’re now the bosses, and we can get away with whatever,’ ” says Mr. Edwards, now a vice president at the Aspen Institute and author of the book “The Parties Versus the People: How to Turn Republicans and Democrats into Americans.”

Like Trump, some appointees entered the cabinet with no prior experience in public office. Secretary Carson, at HUD, was a renowned surgeon, and ran briefly for president in 2016, before becoming a prominent defender of Trump and then a cabinet secretary. The purchase of a $31,000 dining set for Carson’s HUD office set off an uproar last month; he has testified that he was not involved in the purchase, and canceled it.

Secretary Mnuchin, a former investment banker and film producer, faced criticism last fall when the Treasury Department’s Office of Inspector General found that seven flights he had taken on military aircraft had cost the federal government more than $800,000. The report stated that no laws were broken, but criticized the use of federal funds all the same.

 

But other Trump appointees came to the administration with extensive experience in government, either as members of Congress or in state government. All have previous experience working under governmental ethics rules. Before coming to Washington, Pruitt was attorney general of Oklahoma and before that, a state senator.

Kind words for Pruitt, but ...

Both Carson and Mnuchin seem to have weathered their storms. But Pruitt may not. Trump still praises him publicly – he’s doing a “great job,” the president tweeted on Friday – but such kind words are no guarantee of job security. According to news reports, chief of staff John Kelly advised Trump last week to fire Pruitt, though Trump wasn't ready to let him go at that point. Friday morning, Trump and Pruitt met. 

The dilemma for Trump is that, as head of the EPA, Pruitt is doing exactly what the president wants – rolling back environmental regulations that he says have been holding back economic growth. Three Republican members of the House have called for Pruitt’s resignation. But prominent conservatives have defended him, including Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Rand Paul of Kentucky.

Senator Paul tweeted Thursday that Pruitt is “likely the bravest and most conservative member of Trump’s cabinet” and is needed to help Trump “drain the regulatory swamp.” Senator Cruz, in a tweet, blamed “Obama and his media cronies” for wanting to drive Pruitt out.

Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh opened his show Thursday with a full-throated defense of Pruitt, blaming the liberal “deep state” for attacking the embattled EPA administrator. Mr. Limbaugh, with millions of listeners, has broad power to influence public discourse among Trump supporters.

Other conservatives speak of a “witch hunt” against Pruitt – the same language Trump uses when speaking of the Mueller investigation.

“The ‘witch hunt’ meme comes from the top, and is applied to anyone who disagrees with the president,” says James Pfiffner, professor of public policy at George Mason University. “Instead of confronting the issue, or arguing against the allegations, they resort to name calling. It is very sad.”

  • Confused 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.