It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump to Fox News: I may defund California as 'a weapon' to fight illegal immigration

page: 8
75
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Bingo !!





posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

That is not what the law says.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

That is what your source says. Why did you link it?

The law says that no one can prevent someone from transmitting that information. It does not require that information be transmitted.


edit on 2/5/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Syphon
Perhaps California will decide to hold on to the $406 billion dollars in federal tax revenue it generates every year.


Considering the bulk of that come from the property taxes for 1200 sq foot million dollar homes.

Maybe they should stop ripping off their residents.


Actually, ALL of that comes from federal income tax, which CA can't stop from being withheld. This would make CA a much more massive supporter of the beggar States than it already is. That is, until the state collapses from lack of federal funds itself. At that point, the nation's biggest revenue contributor would fail.

Purposefully providing sanctuary to illegal aliens seems absurd and stupid - I realize CA's Big Ag corporations think they need their cheap labor to keep profits high, and thus, they want to protect their illegal workforce, but defunding the state is insanity.

Nice threat, but if it's serious and not just "big talk", then Trump should resign immediately. It's not worth destroying CA and the rest of the US over.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: avgguy

It depends. If there is a law which says you will not, you will not.

Is there a law that says that if a State (or city) does not enforce federal law (which, btw, is different from following federal law) it does not qualify for federal funding? Is there a law which links funding to such?


Executive order.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee


Executive order.

An EO is not a law.
But you know that.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Look, California is a State in this republic. If they "choose" to disregard the laws there are legal sanctions for that behavior. No one wants to see either side "Push this but if Cali does then what happens ,happens. I don't for one minute believe that the legislators speak for their constituents there, just the political donors.

Right now it's up to the unheard to speak up and make sure their legislators hear them.

Trump is well within his rights and the law to withhold Federal funding and bring them to heel. Their call.
IMO it's long overdue.

The State has been insolvent for quite a few years while they pass overly restrictive laws out of misguided intent.
If you can't float your own boat you get no say in much of anything till you right your own house.

I see this as a "reset for Cali



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BlueAjah

That is what your source says. Why did you link it?

The law says that no one can prevent someone from transmitting that information. It does not require that information be transmitted.



The quote you have is not from the law, it is from the grant requirement, and you are misrepresenting by not including the complete text in context.

It also says:

the statute prohibits government entities and officials from taking action to prohibit or in any way restrict the maintenance or intergovernmental exchange of such information, including through written or unwritten policies or practices.


So, if they are asked for information, they must supply it.
They just do not need to go out collecting it, as in knocking on doors.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: Annee

How does that have to do with the thread?


That Trump thinks its just fine to turn off people's heat and electricity to get what he wants?

Seems to fit perfectly to me.

However, a president of a country is about the people.


Well, recent polls showed the majority of California residents were against sanctuary cities.

So expect recall votes for the criminal elected officials in California failing to represent their citizens.


A Breitbart poll?

Mexicans were the original citizens of California (except for indigenous)

They are so entwined its like North and South Korea. Families on both sides of the border.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Caver78




Trump is well within his rights and the law to withhold Federal funding and bring them to heel.

Which law?
He can certainly issue another EO (I thought EOs were bad), and it would certainly go through the courts.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Absolutely, if you don't want to follow the law that's great, but don't expect those pay checks to keep coming from Uncle Sam.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

We just discussed this



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Caver78
For far too long this issue has gone unresolved, yes there are people that want to see it pushed.

edit on 5-2-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah




So, if they are asked for information, they must supply it.

Are they not doing so? How does the law require that information be requested? Surely there are parameters. If not, it would seem to be overly broad. Like a game of Fish, "Give me all your sixes." If the State is in violation of the law, why would the president have to make threats?
edit on 2/5/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 09:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Caver78




Trump is well within his rights and the law to withhold Federal funding and bring them to heel.

Which law?
He can certainly issue another EO (I thought EOs were bad), and it would certainly go through the courts.

The Executive Order was issued January 25, 2017.
Its old news.
Yes, it will be a matter for the courts when it is challenged.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee


The Executive Order was issued January 25, 2017.
Then why is Trump making this new threat now?

edit on 2/5/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: D8Tee


The Executive Order was issued January 25, 2017.
Then why is Trump making this new threat now?

He's been busy?
I don't know.
The executive order for this issue has been released, January 25, 2017.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee




He's been busy?

Forgetful?



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

My thought was they will do California like they did Louisiana. Remember when they were trying to get all the states to make the drinking age 21. Louisiana and a few other states held out until the government threatened to defund certain programs. Not sure legally how they did it but the government has done similar things before...

Oh yea the lgtb thing recently in one of the southern states. I remember reading about them threatening to defund programs as well. Details are fuzzy but they've done it before.



posted on Feb, 5 2017 @ 10:07 PM
link   
why is a state like california being funded by the government when nearly half this country is falling apart?




top topics



 
75
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join