U.S. Justice Dept weighs stripping federal funds from cities allowing 'anarchy'

[Sujo]

31 minutes ago, pkspeaker said:

it was close enough of a majority that he won.. sandg was right-the vast majority of american's are on the side of law and order and that will be very evident in November.. BLM/antifa has no real support.. it's a sham bankrolled by billionaires and multi-national corporate a-holes.. it goes around in small groups 'protesting' against the latest killing of a violent repeat offender that was on drugs at the time of his altercation with police.. ridiculous  

No it wasnt a majority at all. It was a minority.

[Sujo]

On 9/23/2020 at 8:40 AM, timkeen08 said:

"Prevent from continuing to receive funds".  Not the incorrect realocation of funds definition that has been created for the political purposes of deflection.  Just a quick google search.

defunding police, which is what the poster said, does not have the same definition. Perhaps a better way to say it is re allocation.

 

Best you do more than a quick search.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, pkspeaker said:

it was close enough of a majority that he won.. sandg was right-the vast majority of american's are on the side of law and order and that will be very evident in November.. BLM/antifa has no real support.. it's a sham bankrolled by billionaires and multi-national corporate a-holes.. it goes around in small groups 'protesting' against the latest killing of a violent repeat offender that was on drugs at the time of his altercation with police.. ridiculous  

 

Your first sentence unclear. Most voters did not vote for Trump. That's a fact. What the 'vast majority of Americans' may or may not do, we'll know come November. So far, there is no clear indication that a major shift in Trump's favor is about to happen. I've no idea what you're on about with BLM/Antifa not having real support - unless you missed it, they aren't running for POTUS. Yet another muddled rant....

[plentyofnuttin]

On 9/22/2020 at 7:34 PM, Tippaporn said:

Nope.  Lived there most of my life.  Sure, Congress has the power of the purse.  But that's just the short of it.

 

New York Post - Trump orders review to defund NYC, other ‘anarchist’ cities

 

From President Trump's memo:  “To ensure that Federal funds are neither unduly wasted nor spent in a manner that directly violates our Government’s promise to protect life, liberty, and property, it is imperative that the Federal Government review the use of Federal funds by jurisdictions that permit anarchy, violence, and destruction in America’s cities.”

 

It's understood that any action President Trump deems he can take legally will be met with lawsuits.  But if he can find ways within legal means then go for it.  Why in the world would anyone be in support of allowing funds to be used for the benefit of the people to continue to flow to them when these Dem mayors and Governors are abdicating their responsibilities to protect their citizens from violence?  You're arguing for an upside down world.

Trump has already tried something similar and got shot down. Maybe you think that tying up the courts for doomed efforts is okay. It's not.

Trump Can’t Defund New York

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/trump-cant-defund-new-york/

 

And of course, Support for Trump's attempt completely expose the fakeness of right wingers alleged support for state and local rights.

[timkeen08]

3 hours ago, Sujo said:

defunding police, which is what the poster said, does not have the same definition. Perhaps a better way to say it is re allocation.

 

Best you do more than a quick search.

That's your social definition.  Try this: to withdraw financial support from, especially as an instrument of legislative control: Many university programs were defunded by the recent government cutbacks. to deplete the financial resources of: The cost of the lawsuit defunded the company's operating budget.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

Bill Barr seems to hang on to a bit of credibility in some eyes, which he doesn't deserve, because of his previous work with George H W Bush and because he thinks pretty fast on his feet. 

I am just waiting for that one action of his that will be a tipping point, such that he loses all credibility to the broader population, like other Trump lackeys.

The way he's doing Trumps bidding that tipping point shouldn't be too far away.