Trump Issues Warning to California Governor About Homeless Crisis

Townhall.com ^ | December 26, 2019 | Leah Barkoukis

[samtheman]

I’m comfortable watching. I’m comfortable having an opinion. I’m comfortable supporting Trump even if my opinion on this differs from his.

[Agamemnon]

His lawyers who obviously went to law school where they DON’T teach you the Constitution as written and originally understood and intended, may or may not know the subtle perversions of the Constitution that have taken place over the last 100 or so years.

Ever been to law school yourself? He's advised on legal matters by the likes of Jay Sekulow, Kellyanne Conway, Pam Bondi to name a few. What evidence do you have that their knowledge of the Constitution is so impoverished?

What if anything do you think any of Trump's appointees to Federal Courts know about the Constitution? Start with Kavanaugh and Gorsuch and wind through the names of > 100 judicial appointments Trump has made to the Federal Bench. What evidence do you have that their knowledge of the Constitution is so impoverished?

Your broad strokes of judgment only reveal your lack of judgment and simplistic application of what little knowledge you manifest generally on this topic.

FReegards!

[Bommer]

Trump doesn’t have to do anything really. All he needs to do is crap all the liberals laws down their own throats!
EPA and CDC could fine the crap out of the state for pollution and collera.
Charge the California legislature with violating human rights by not providing adequate shelter and health care to the homeless.
I’m sure there are other creative measures to punish the hell out of them. But if Trump steps in and turn things around before the election, California would be in play! Doubt it, but never under estimate the will of Trump!

[zencycler]

In theory, even for the most ardent state-sovereignty-protecting Constitutionalist, there must be some point at which a state of emergency of any type, gets so bad, and so beyond the ability of the state to handle on its own, that everyone would agree the federal government needs to intervene, even take control, at least until that emergency no longer exists.

Therefore, a warning that the feds “will” intervene if the problem isn’t fixed, and continues to get worse, is, in fact, inevitable at some future point.

The issue is, then, when is such a warning appropriate.

[samtheman]

The issue is, then, when is such a warning appropriate.
—
To me it isn’t whether this warning is appropriate now or later or at all.

To me it is focusing on a pot hole problem in San Francisco while an enemy invasion is taking place in Virginia.

Sure, set up a federal pot-hole-fixit program for Sh*t Francisco sometime at your leisure.

But right now there is a major constitutional crisis happening in Virginia.

And in Virginia Trump can and should be taking very public, very clear steps (with an announcement about federalizing the National Guard) to protect US citizen constitutional rights in that state, now under siege.

[faithhopecharity]

understood

[semaj]

Newsome rminds me of that character from Fast Times at Ridgemont High.

[SgtHooper]

Donald, do not intervene!! Let them rot!!

[Secret Agent Man]

Not fedgov’s jobto fixthe state’s problems.

If he can do it for zero dollars, fine, otherwise stay out.

[Uncle Sham]

"Not fedgov’s jobto fixthe state’s problems. If he can do it for zero dollars, fine, otherwise stay out"

Not fedgov’s job to fix the state’s problems.

Just stop there.

If you begin the premise that the feds can fix the state's problems this time because it doesn't cost anything, you have opened a Pandora's box of unlimited federal involvement with state issues, most of which will be costly. Only the citizens of California get to vote for their representation both at the state and at the federal level. Asking the rest of us to pay to fix their state's problems amounts to taxation WITHOUT representation.

[Secret Agent Man]

You fell for it.

Nothing can be fixed for zero dollars.

GOT YA.

[5th MEB]

I am a native Californian and still live in California.

I DON’T want my federal taxes used to bail out failed Democrap policies or the results of those policies.

PRESIDENT TRUMP (damn, I just love saying that) needs to allow my state to die in the cold, the wet, and the dark if necessary!

[DownInFlames]

CA is going to be the next Love Canal. It will qualify for an EPA superfund.

[momincombatboots]

Another federal bailout for CA. Responsible states and their taxpayers are about to get robbed, again. Not just no.

[Spktyr]

So, it’s okay for California to ship the homeless to other states and for untreated human waste to be dumped in the oceans by California? Neither is in the original Constitution, but at the very least the latter is Federally illegal. Should not the officials in CA be prosecuted under existing Federal law, or since it’s not ‘original’, should we let them walk on that?

[trebb]

Don’t be a concern troll - condemning what you can visualize/presume/guess that he might do is no different than what all the Dem impeachment “witnesses” did.....snowflakes do what snowflakes do...

[DoodleDawg]

Governor Gavin N has done a really bad job on taking care of the homeless population in California. If he can’t fix the problem, the Federal Govt. will get involved!

Empty threats accomplish nothing.

[DoodleDawg]

Don’t be a concern troll - condemning what you can visualize/presume/guess that he might do is no different than what all the Dem impeachment “witnesses” did.....snowflakes do what snowflakes do...

So what do you visualize/presume/guess Trump can do about the problem?

[trebb]

I don’t presume anything - I just know that President Trump always seems to have the right answer and whether it be actual action or just added leverage from publicizing the “conversation”, he tends to make things move in the right direction.

A better question might be, “Why do so many concern trolls keep presuming and lamenting the worst, despite having as much evidence such ‘concern’ is justifiable as the Dems have for impeachment?”