Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
That there may be one more unintended consequence...... Thats my point.... Just like the unintended consequence of that fire sale brought us to where we are today as a nation.....
And when they do take those businesses will a message will be sent to all of NYC homed business.....
You see the exodus of retail and mom and pop businesses from certain cites due to relaxed petty crime laws.....Will the same happen to NYC based big business........Tax base and employment effected... Empty buildings once full.....
The city is already under stress due to immigration and the small retailer outlets...Not to mention population dropping after the pandemic.... Will big business decide its time to move on,,,,,
NYC just may join the realm of much of the country that lost its tax base, population and small business due to the fire sale of American Industry....
Search,,,Dems losing minority and young voters....
‘The Elite’s Destruction of Civic Customs Is Complete’
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/04/07/trump-indictment-roundup-future-00090838
In Tuesday afternoon, against the blue-sky backdrop of one of the first spring-like days in New York, Donald Trump’s eight-car motorcade arrived at the Manhattan district attorney’s office. He was there to turn himself in ahead of his arraignment on criminal charges related to hush money he paid to an adult film star, Stormy Daniels, during the 2016 campaign. His indictment marks the first time a former — and certainly the first time a former and possibly future — president has been charged with criminal conduct.
After almost a decade of Trump’s rewriting most of the rules in politics, his indictment could blow up another norm: The perception of the legal system’s independence from politics. Conservatives and Republicans have argued that Trump’s prosecution was politically motivated, coming from a liberal DA who campaigned on holding Trump accountable. (Even some liberal analysts have pointed to the flimsiness of the 34 felony counts Trump has been charged with.) Meanwhile, most liberals and Democrats argue that it’s a triumph of law and order over a president who has long evaded consequences for his actions
Will this prosecution change politics as we know it?
POLITICO Magazine reached out to a group of the sharpest legal and political minds to get their take on how the charges leveled at Trump could usher in a new era of politics, with consequences that will reverberate long after Trump’s trial, long after the 2024 campaign and long after Trump is out of office — or, as the case may be, out of prison.
The last time everyone had it out for Trump like this, he became president.
In the United States, no citizen is privileged above any other. The problem for Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg, therefore, is not to show that Donald Trump was indicted despite being a former president but to prove that Trump wasn’t indicted because he was the former president. Trump isn’t above any law, no matter how relatively small, but he also shouldn’t be below basic notions of fairness. Even after Bragg unveiled the 34-count indictment and 13-page statement of facts, it is still not clear what the legal theory of this case is. And that is a problem.
The DA has brought a charge that is on shaky legal ground — and in all the explanations he provided this week, he has not specified the elements he intends to prove at trial and has left open questions about what evidence he has to prove basic parts of his case. Despite some wishful thinking I’ve seen from some folks online, I can tell you these are not signs of strength from a prosecutor.
This gets to the political ramifications of these charges. By bringing a case that is so open to criticism from lawyers across the political spectrum, Bragg has left himself open to criticism that he has brought charges against Trump because Trump is a politically popular target with his largely liberal constituents. During his 2021 campaign, Bragg emphasized the importance of the Trump investigation and of electing someone who could hold Trump accountable.
The predictable result is that Republicans — both voters and Trump’s potential rivals for the nomination — have responded to these perceived political attacks by circling their wagons around Trump despite the fact that his alleged conduct, paying off an adult film actress, would seem to put him at odds with most social conservatives. Meanwhile, Democrats are quietly rooting for Trump to be the Republican nominee because they believe he is the easier candidate to defeat in a general election.
And if all that sounds eerily familiar, it’s because it is. Last time, it resulted in Trump being elected as the 45th president of the United States.
“Local Republican prosecutors may explore whether they, too, can criminally pursue national political leaders from the opposing party.”
I think the situation surrounding the prosecution is too unstable and unprecedented to venture any firm predictions for how it might affect politics in the short term, including the 2024 election. Trump and his supporters have been touting the fact that many of his supporters are rallying around him, but that gives us only a partial and potentially very misleading picture of the political impact across the entire U.S. voter base. It is useful to recall that during his presidency, Trump would tout the fact that he had high favorability numbers among self-identified Republicans even though national polling consistently showed that he was well underwater with voters across the country, and of course, he went on to easily lose to Joe Biden in 2020.
I do not have a crystal ball, but I find it hard to believe that in the aggregate it could help a national presidential candidate in this country to be under indictment. Indeed, at the moment, Democratic voters — at least judging by my inbox! — appear just as energized by the indictment and just as uninterested in questions about the strength or propriety — or even the underlying facts — of the case against Trump. Many of them believe (not unreasonably) that the man is a uniquely dangerous political figure, and after years of many liberal legal pundits telling the public that Trump could easily be put in prison if only some prosecutor had the courage to do it (which has always been far too simple-minded), they seem to believe that the prosecution is justified in large part because it could help prevent Trump from retaking office. They may ultimately be right about that.
Over the long term — and here I am talking about years, if not decades — I expect local Republican prosecutors may explore whether they, too, can criminally pursue national political leaders from the opposing party, even if the case appears literally unprecedented. Needless to say, we do not know whether Trump will be charged by the Justice Department in the ongoing investigation into January 6 and the classified documents stored at Mar-a-Lago, but if that happens, that could dissipate the short- and long-term political effects of the Manhattan DA’s case.
It could also re-focus the country’s attention on where I think it should have been immediately after Biden came into office — ensuring that our presidents are subject to swift and robust legal accountability from our only nationally representative prosecutorial body. Such an outcome in that case, I believe, is more likely to secure broad-based public and political support, more likely to demonstrate strong and compelling legal cases and more likely to obtain significant sanctions upon a conviction, like imprisonment.
“In the coming months, we shall see pro-Trump forces using the same corrosive tactics — or lose utterly.”
Anyone who spends a single second treating this case as a legal action is either wasting his breath or participating in the program. At the upper levels, our juridical condition changed forever on November 9, 2016, when the unexpected, the impossible, the unthinkable happened, and the “power elite” haven’t recovered. The very fact of Trump’s victory proved that the system itself needed a correction.
It was necessary to manufacture the undoing of Trump, the withdrawal of legitimacy, the reversal of history by other means. And so we got allegations of collusion with Russia, Stormy Daniels, “RESIST!,” impeachments, lawfare of various types, the Jan. 6 show trial, the Mar-a-Lago raid … and now the indictment. They’re all of a piece. Who cares how much these actions have distorted and vulgarized the public square? If they demoralize Trump supporters, the Great Unwashed, so much the better. Anything to discredit and topple their leader, no matter how flimsy and perverse the aggression.
A day or two after Trump won, I stepped inside the Union Square subway station in New York and discovered a long wall covered with post-it notes, thousands of them, all from Trump opponents, each bearing an expression of pain, dismay, fear or rage. This is not a sane reaction, I thought. None of the authors would worry if a newspaper broadcast an allegation against Trump using only one anonymous source, or if a prosecutor bent the law to absurd lengths to get an indictment. Rule of law, equal treatment, due process, democratic process, a Fourth Estate suspicious of the power elite … such norms don’t apply to a malignant agent. As a result, Trump opponents have become so illiberal, tribal and fixated that they’re ready to accept gross violations of civic tradition in order to take him down.
Those who support Trump must acknowledge this new illiberal reality. The elite’s destruction of civic customs is complete. In the coming months, we shall see pro-Trump forces using the same corrosive tactics — or lose utterly.
“The start of a new era in which no one is above the law.”
indictment might have a somewhat counterintuitive effect on the 2024 nomination race: His legal troubles might encourage other Republicans to get into the race, as we saw with long-shot candidate Asa Hutchinson last week. So far, we haven’t seen a stampede of new candidates. But if that does happen in response to any perceived vulnerability on Trump’s part, having a larger field of candidates could help him win the nomination by splitting up the non-Trump vote.
The connection between politics and presidential accountability is an even more interesting one, in my opinion. We don’t have a monarchy in this country, and presidents are supposed to have the same status as everyone else. But the presidency has long had an air of ceremony and statesmanship, signifying the power it holds. This makes the politics of holding the president accountable especially painful, for their political supporters and the country as a whole. Part of the logic of President Gerald Ford’s pardon of President Richard Nixon after Watergate was to end our “national nightmare.” But in 2023, things have changed. Politics often feels like a nightmare anyway, so there’s no sense in trying to dodge the conflict inevitable in a post-presidential investigation. Polarization has helped to erode some of the mystique of the office, and that might be a good thing in the end.
It’s impossible to separate law from politics entirely when charging a former president. It’s going to be messy, but possibly the start of a new era in which no one is above the law — not even those once charged with executing it.
This prosecution may be the only way to avert a slide into authoritarianism.
As I wrote for POLITICO Magazine precisely a year ago, the cost of not indicting Trump would be a presidency without guardrails. Today, the stakes of this prosecution are arguably even higher, as he’s now a candidate for the 2024 presidential race and favored for the Republican nomination. Numerous polls have him at a double-digit lead over Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.
Trump deserves credit for one thing, at the very least: He says what he is going to do, and he does it. If he is the GOP nominee, there are two possible outcomes. Both are deeply disturbing.
Trump could lose the election again. If that happens, he won’t go quietly. Nor will his supporters, who could revert to violence. A survey conducted for CNN last month showed that 63 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents still believe that President Joe Biden did not legitimately win enough votes to win the presidency. A study by the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project and Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund found that, over the 18-month period from January 2020 through June 2021, there were 560 events where demonstrators brandished firearms, with violence erupting 16 percent of the time. The authors find that armed demonstrations are nearly six times as likely to turn violent than unarmed ones, and that the majority of armed demonstrations are driven by far-right mobilization and reactions to liberal and progressive activity.
The second option is that Trump wins the election, either legitimately or with the aid of Republican state legislatures’ caving to pressure to cancel popular votes for the Democratic candidate. GOP members of Congress could also refuse to gavel in a Democratic winner in January 2025, and successfully halt the vote count. Assuming he manages to take office, a second Trump presidency is a terrifying prospect. Just this week, Trump argued for defunding the Justice Department and the FBI, and he has previously planned to empty the national security and intelligence apparatuses and the State Department and replace staff with loyalists — a plan reported back in July. In 2019, Trump tweeted that his supporters could “demand” that he not leave office after two terms.
If any of that happens, America will no longer be a democracy. One way to prevent these outcomes is a criminal conviction for Trump, which will make it much harder for voters to support him and for GOP allies in Congress to continue their unabashed support. For now, we best not avert our gaze from the possible dangers ahead.
I’m not the best at political prognosticating. For instance, I never expected that Trump would survive a full term in office. And on the merits, he shouldn’t have. (Remember the first impeachment?) What I didn’t expect was the GOP’s craven complicity in his serial misdeeds. With few exceptions, they have slowly allowed themselves to be boiled alive in the toxic stew that Trump created — and kept refilling.
Will this historic first indictment of a U.S. president snap them out of it? I doubt it. Before even seeing the indictment, a large swath of the GOP and conservative media were condemning New York City’s district attorney, Alvin Bragg, for what they claim is a politically motivated prosecution. The criticism has hardly abated since the arraignment, either. Part of the problem is the complex, connect-the-dots nature of the crime alleged — paying a porn star “hush money,” but doing so by allegedly falsifying business records, which in turn is alleged to have been done to hide the story during the end stages of the 2016 presidential campaign. This isn’t the sort of crime that most people can really wrap their heads around, so Trump’s supporters can continue to trash the prosecutor. Even Utah Senator Mitt Romney has joined the condemnation choir, accusing Bragg of “stretching” the law to “fit a political agenda."
But maybe this first indictment is just proof of concept; that, after well over 200 years since the founding of the country, a U.S. president can be held accountable. The dam has broken. And there are other, more significant investigations that may soon lead to further indictments — both by Fulton County Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis, and by Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice. Whether our dismal political landscape may finally begin to shift will likely turn on whether these cases lead to further legal jeopardy for the former president, and whether the GOP will be made to pay at the polls in 2024 for continuing to ride the Trump train until it derails for good.
“The end result is long-term damage to the public’s confidence in the rule of law.”
Donald Trump now faces criminal charges in Manhattan, and soon he may face charges in Fulton County, Georgia, and perhaps in one or more federal courts. He has been attacking prosecutors and judges long before these criminal investigations were initiated, and he has already started making personal attacks against the judge and prosecutor in the Manhattan case. His words and actions have sown distrust in our criminal justice system and distract from the charges brought in Manhattan, which may soon be eclipsed by weightier charges brought in other jurisdictions.
A Secret Service officer standing behind a barricade outside of Trump Tower, with another man walking in front of him.
After almost a decade of Trump’s rewriting most of the rules in politics, his indictment could blow up another norm: The perception of the legal system’s independence from politics. | Bryan Anselm for POLITICO
Regardless of how those charges play out, the end result is long-term damage to the public’s confidence in the rule of law and the ability of the criminal justice system to police corruption in politics. We will ultimately pay a higher price than Trump does.
“This prosecution marks an end to the era of conflict avoidance with Trump and his fellow travelers.”
Will Stancil is a policy researcher at the University of Minnesota.
It’s about time. A terrible legacy of Trump’s presidency is how he taught the worst political figures that they could bluff their way into total impunity. It’s become self-perpetuating: Authorities looked at the system’s inability to hold Trump accountable and took it as proof of his untouchability — or worse, assumed that accountability risks devastating political backlash.
Trump hasn’t wriggled his way out of various legal jams so much as law enforcement has talked itself out of putting him into those jams. It’s telling that the conspiracy at the root of Trump’s New York charges was also the subject of federal investigation — an investigation which has seemingly vanished into Merrick Garland’s filing cabinet. And of course, these charges are the least of Trump’s crimes.
We endanger ourselves when we won’t impose consequences on the powerful. This prosecution marks an end to the era of conflict avoidance with Trump and his political fellow travelers. That’s bad news for someone like Donald Trump, but a happy day for America.
Think that was a Trump endorsement? Or just a truth that's not complementary....
If you want to be honest about anything you have to look at both sides of issues.....Not just defend one and act as the other party does....It does the word honesty no favor....
James made a purely politically motived charge by stretching the law past any norm.....That sir is damaging the institution of what we call the rule of law.....
Wield the law with integrity, be above reproach and all will be well, you will have proven your honesty beyond a doubt
Can't say politically motivated, lol.......Since she ran on it she had to come up with something, oops no money laundering, nothing else...,,,So lets help out that division thing she spoke of with 'trumped' up charges....did she help or hurt? And hows that no bail and 1000 shoplifting thing working out, ask those retail outlets and mom and pop stores....
But you can't say it was politically motivated.......
Duh,,,She ran on Get Trump....
For the record, its a 100mil in corporate cash......Seems all that type of investing has paid dividends over the years......Just Say'n
No doubt about trump....Just not too smart on the other stuff though....Fully expected dems to smarter than this these last 3 yrs.....
Thats it for me
GN
Of course he did,,,,,,,,,Delay tactics, trump? Lol.....And all you care about, out loud, is to get him before the election....
And a blindness to understand the ramifications in atmospheres such as this..... Everything you're scared of your bringing about...the s.o.b. was dead in the water practically, even compared to Desantis, before the Bragg indictment...
Now you're just playing dumb....Great for the peanut gallary, but not good for real life...your stuck on being dismissive or it just a matter of sticking your head in the sand,,,maybe its just being spoiled to getting your way....
Why in the heck did they wait so long....Gee 4 cases up for trial during the campaign season......And everyday on the news dems say hurry get him before the election....
I know you don't give a rats butt about the narrative, but you should.
And just who do you think told Nixon, its time to go bud....
Oh no, the QAnon crap is what you want to focus on, there is half the country that sees it as abuse of power and you play right into it.....
By this point I don't see anyone denying the income inequity that over come us and the world, you really need to catch up on that......
So what are you going to show those lunatics, their conspiracies are right......Not that you are above the frey.........Feed right into it that you'll abuse power and twist the laws, then stick your nose up at them like the elites haven't taken from them to begin with?
Wow
Your comparing these days to the watergate era??? What was that about bubbles.....
Its your right to dismiss the facts, better yet the majority of that one poll is repubs, I think was at 90%.....And a majority of the country in total...........What your not considering is there is an element of truth to it which dems freely admit....
Acting condescending and dismissive to so many, is a bubble all its own.....
Not using all the Nazi rhetoric, thats good
Good enough
More to the point, homelessness boils down to income inequity,,,,Its that simple
The you have the latest points made on how California spent 17 billion that never made it to the streets.....As the other report noted,,,most of the homeless are employed, they were once housed.....Getting rehoused is beyond their means due to the high cost of living.....
On to the follow up,,,,CA is going to spend billions more siting mental health as the real cause...(not that money spent on that wont be well spent if it makes it to the streets for mental health) but it wont help the majority of homeless..
Katie did the math, follow along (or move on)...Gotta wonder where the woman is today
Seems this is how it works,,,,,Real Estate folk value their property higher to get loans, the the bank negotiates that value.......Then you have the actual value used for property tax.........A game played by all, not that trumps valuing for loans wasn't excessive, it was, remember the bank then negotiated......
Tax assessing price, not sure on those big properties,,,,And then there is what a property actually sells for
By any stretch, Trump was treated much differently than the rest.....Which is the cause of contention and leads to political strife or is applauded depending.....
James running on get trump and stretching the law doesn't help
The handyman....The Squatter Hunter" takes aim at illegal tenants across California
Pretty smart fella actually,,,,getting his own show to as I said.......
https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/the-squatter-hunter-takes-aim-at-illegal-tenants-across-california/
All I'm doing is becoming a squatter and flipping this process on them," Shelton said. "I figured if they could take a house, I could take a house."
Shelton has been busy taking back properties across the West Coast for the last year, starting his mission after a squatter invaded his mother's home that they were trying to sell.
In response, Shelton had his mother give him a lease for the home so that he could move in — making things very uncomfortable for the squatter.
"I'm not going in and I'm not hurting anyone. I'm not kicking them out, I'm not throwing them out," Shelton said.
Instead, he's turning the tables, forcing those squatters to go to court in order to fight to get the property for themselves, as opposed to the homeowner having to go to court to get them out.
Since posting his first video on YouTube more than a year ago, Shelton has been able to do it a dozen more times.
He makes his way into homes occupied by squatters, squatting along side them until he can force them to leave. He brings cameras, recording every moment as he creates as many minor nuisances as he can until they get fed up with him.
Shelton says that the issue isn't isolated in California, and that the United Nations estimates there are at least a billion squatters worldwide.
As he continues to fight on his own terms, he's pushing for lawmakers to make things more official.
"Squatters laws never were intended for residential properties," he said. "They were never intended to support breaking into someone's house."
Shelton contends that there needs to be a clearer definition between tenant rights and squatter rights.
"It needs to be separated out to where squatting — criminal tenants serve civil process."
Until then, he plans to continue helping as many homeowners as he can, pushing out those who don't belong.
Dissolving Trump’s business empire would stand apart in history of NY fraud law
Here's a non partisan piece on the fraud trail if you care to read it
https://apnews.com/article/trump-fraud-business-law-courts-banks-lending-punishment-2ee9e509a28c24d0cda92da2f9a9b689
You should've read the material I posted....Nothing like you described,,, as usual
Original
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174075850
Follow up
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174082321
The squatter video
Not hard if you really want to find it....People are taking advantage of laws ment to protect people from predatory landlord and bank evictions......Now the laws are working in the squatters favor....Homeowners can be arrested for trying to remove squatters and are to........One handyman has learned to out smart the system and the squatters....
The vid in question
Venezuelan migrant tells his followers on social media that you can just squat in people's homes in the US to take them over. pic.twitter.com/aa75uDTZSU
— Catch Up (@CatchUpFeed) March 20, 2024
You earned 'It'
For a Psychopath on a government watch list you never fail....
Dems joined in the attack....Yes indeed its bigger than just CA....
And yes it goes back to Thatcher, Reagan and The Lewis Powell Memo...... It started with Carter somewhat with the dems, then it was All In with Clinton... The dems literally sold out America and became apart of the attack spoken of........It will be our demise.....
We’re in the middle of an attack on our essential nature, she says, an attack on our economic and emotional well-being.
The Lewis Powell Memo: A Corporate Blueprint to Dominate Democracy
https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/democracy/the-lewis-powell-memo-a-corporate-blueprint-to-dominate-democracy/
( too long to post, but a very good read, here is wiki)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_F._Powell_Jr.
Powell Memorandum, 1971
See also: Corporatocracy, Merchants of Doubt, Inverted totalitarianism, and Evil Geniuses: The Unmaking of America
On August 23, 1971, prior to accepting Nixon's nomination to the Supreme Court, Powell was commissioned by his neighbor Eugene B. Sydnor Jr., a close friend and education director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to write a confidential memorandum for the chamber entitled "Attack on the American Free Enterprise System," an anti-Communist and anti-New Deal blueprint for conservative business interests to retake America.[16][17] It was based in part on Powell's reaction to the work of activist Ralph Nader, whose 1965 exposé on General Motors, Unsafe at Any Speed, put a focus on the auto industry putting profit ahead of safety, which triggered the American consumer movement. Powell saw it as an undermining of the power of private business and a step toward socialism.[16] His experiences as a corporate lawyer and a director on the board of Phillip Morris from 1964 until his appointment to the Supreme Court made him a champion of the tobacco industry who railed against the growing scientific evidence linking smoking to cancer deaths.[16] He argued, unsuccessfully, that tobacco companies' First Amendment rights were being infringed when news organizations were not giving credence to the cancer denials of the industry.[16]
The memo called for corporate America to become more aggressive in molding society's thinking about business, government, politics and law in the US. It inspired wealthy heirs of earlier American industrialists, the Earhart Foundation (whose money came from an oil fortune), and the Smith Richardson Foundation (from the cough medicine dynasty)[16] to use their private charitable foundations-which did not have to report their political activities-to join the Carthage Foundation, founded by Richard Mellon Scaife in 1964.[16] The Carthage Foundation pursued Powell's vision of a pro-business, anti-socialist, minimally government-regulated America based on what he thought America had been in the heyday of early American industrialism, before the Great Depression and the rise of Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal.
The Powell Memorandum ultimately came to be a blueprint for the rise of the American conservative movement and the formation of a network of influential right-wing think tanks and lobbying organizations, such as the Business Roundtable, The Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), and inspired the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to become far more politically active.[18][19][20] CUNY professor David Harvey traces the rise of neoliberalism in the US to this memo.[21][22] Historian Gary Gerstle refers to the memo as "a neoliberal call to arms."[18] Political scientist Aaron Good describes it as an "inverted totalitarian manifesto" designed to identify threats to the established economic order following the democratic upsurge of the 1960s.[23]
Powell argued, "The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism came from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians." In the memorandum, Powell advocated "constant surveillance" of textbook and television content, as well as a purge of left-wing elements. He named consumer advocate Nader as the chief antagonist of American business. Powell urged conservatives to undertake a sustained media-outreach program, including funding neoliberal scholars, publishing books, papers, popular magazines, and scholarly journals, and influencing public opinion.[24][25]
This memo foreshadowed a number of Powell's court opinions, especially First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, which shifted the direction of First Amendment law by declaring that corporate financial influence of elections by independent expenditures should be protected with the same vigor as individual political speech. Much of the future Court opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission relied on the same arguments raised in Bellotti.
Although written confidentially for Sydnor at the Chamber of Commerce, it was discovered by Washington Post columnist Jack Anderson, who reported on its content a year later (after Powell had joined the Supreme Court). Anderson alleged that Powell was trying to undermine the democratic system; however, in terms of business's view of itself in relation to government and public interest groups, the memo could be alternatively read to simply convey conventional thinking among businessmen at the time. The explicit goal of the memo was not to destroy democracy, though its emphasis on political institution-building as a concentration of big business power, particularly updating the Chamber's efforts to influence federal policy, has had that effect.[26] Here, it was a major force in motivating the Chamber and other groups to modernize their efforts to lobby the federal government. Following the memo's directives, conservative foundations greatly increased, pouring money into think-tanks. This rise of conservative lobbying led to the conservative intellectual movement and its increasing influence over mainstream political discourse, starting in the 1970s and 1980s, and due chiefly to the works of the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation.[27]
You will find there is no want or desire to understand one simple fact, that we all have more in common than we don't.......
On to say you will also find that these are not Good people by any definition of the word.......They've gone on to create there own problems by supporting the few over the many by being corporate apologists and what that greed has brought to the country and world. Its a failure to accept those facts that trigger them, they are contrary to what they want to believe.......
There is no leading by example, only the game of zero sum politics.....
Read their own posts is what I'd tell them, Good people?
Nearly 2/3s think charges are politically motivated......Now to deny that, is living in a bubble
Just the first one that came up when you search.....outside of your bubble
62 percent in new poll say federal charges against Trump politically motivated
BY OLAFIMIHAN OSHIN - 06/21/23 4:13 PM ET
https://thehill.com/homenews/4061063-62-percent-in-new-poll-say-federal-charges-against-trump-politically-motivated/
Nearly two-thirds of Americans polled in a Quinnipiac University survey released Wednesday said the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) case against former President Trump over the mishandling of classified documents after he left the White House is mainly motivated by politics.
(Duly noted the 1:30am time mark ;)
Lets forget the state for a minute and its reputation.......As noted before, most of the homeless were once housed, and to get rehoused is beyond their means considering the high cost of living....Remember too, most are employed...And as the writing put it, its a myth that most suffer mental health issues other than simple depression and anxiety....
With 17 billion already spent, going to administrative solutions that never make it to the streets......This is the newest solution.........
Headline politics just doesn't work, not in this state, not the country as a whole.....There is some good stuff in here indeed....But the underlying reason for the homeless crisis is still where the road ends,,,,Income inequity out of control,,,,,,,,,But its better to make headlines
Good timing I might add considering the discussion........Today's headline
California voters pass Proposition 1 to tackle the state's homelessness crisis
https://www.npr.org/2024/03/21/1239811952/california-proposition-1-homeless
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California voters have approved a measure that will impose strict requirements on counties to spend on housing and drug treatment programs to tackle the state's homelessness crisis, in a tissue-thin win for Gov. Gavin Newsom, who personally campaigned for the measure's passage.
Democrats outnumber Republicans by a staggering 2-to-1 in California, and the borderline vote — coming more than two weeks after election day — signaled unease with the state's homeless policies after Newsom's administration invested billions of dollars to get people off the street but no dramatic change has been seen in Los Angeles and other large cities
The state accounts for nearly a third of the homeless population in the United States; roughly 181,000 Californians are in need of housing.
Newsom, who made the measure a signature proposal, spent significant time and money campaigning on its behalf. He raised more than $13 million to promote it with the support of law enforcement, first responders, hospitals and mayors of major cities. Opponents raised just $1,000.
Proposition 1 marks the first update to the state's mental health system in 20 years.
"This is the biggest change in decades in how California tackles homelessness, and a victory for doing things radically different," Newsom said in a statement after the borderline vote. "Now, counties and local officials must match the ambition of California voters. This historic reform will only succeed if we all kick into action immediately – state government and local leaders, together."
Counties will now be required to spend about two-thirds of the money from a voter-approved tax enacted in 2004 on millionaires for mental health services on housing and programs for homeless people with serious mental illnesses or substance abuse problems.
The state, with a current inventory of 5,500 beds, needs some 8,000 more units to treat mental health and addiction issues.
The initiative also allows the state to borrow $6.38 billion to build 4,350 housing units, half of which will be reserved for veterans, and add 6,800 mental health and addiction treatment beds.
Opponents, including social service providers and county officials, said the change will threaten programs that are not solely focused on housing or drug treatment but keep people from becoming homeless in the first place.
Critics said the single formula could mean rural counties such as Butte, with a homeless population of fewer than 1,300 people, would be required to divert the same percentage of funds to housing as urban counties such as San Francisco, which has a homeless population six times bigger.
With makeshift tents lining streets and disrupting businesses in communities across the state, homelessness has become one of the most frustrating issues in California and one sure to dog Newsom should he ever mount a national campaign.
Newsom touted the proposition as the final piece in his plan to reform California's mental health system. He has already pushed for laws that make it easier to force people with behavioral health issues into treatment.
William Elias, a television producer in Sacramento, said he "was on the fence" about Proposition 1 but decided to vote in favor of it because of the pervasive homelessness problem.
Homelessness is compounded by more people losing housing because its unaffordable
"That's something that's all around us right now," he said. "We got all these tents out here in front of City Hall."
Estrellita Vivirito, a Palm Springs resident, also voted 'yes' on the measure.
"It's only logical, you know, we have to do something," she said.
Katherine Wolf, a doctoral student at the University of California, Berkeley, said she voted 'no' on the measure out of concerns it would result in more people being locked up against their will.
"I was appalled of the system of laws that he has been building to kind of erode the rights of people with mental disabilities," Wolf said of Newsom.
Griffin Bovee, a Republican state worker in Sacramento, also voted against the proposition and said the state has been wasting taxpayer money.
"Sacramento really shouldn't get another dime until they actually figure out why what they're doing is not working," he said of the state's handling of the homelessness crisis. "They spent $20 billion over the past few years trying to fix that problem and it got worse."
Revenue from the tax on millionaires, now between $2 billion and $3 billion a year, provides about one-third of the state's total mental health budget.
Opponents, including some county officials, mental health service providers and some Republicans, said the ballot measure would cut funding from cultural centers, peer-support programs and vocational services and would pit those programs against services for homeless people.
Newsom's administration has already spent at least $22 billion on various programs to address the crisis, including $3.5 billion to convert rundown motels into homeless housing. California is also giving out $2 billion in grants to build more treatment facilities.
Just telling you how it looks outside of your bubble.....There is a whole world outside of it, let's say 70 million people
Me personally, I think one case surrounding Jan 6 and all it aspects was the proper way to go....Given the times, historically and stay beyond reproach....
Twist and turn. Screw you and your blatantly dishonest spin
Nothing dishonest about this at all.....It is what it is.....Dems haven't been to smart in the way they've gone after Trump...First you broadcast your intentions.....a then you have crimes that are a stretch of the law....Biden and Hunter both doing wrong in their own way, on to dems condoning to keeping him off the ballot unconstitutionally..........
Just what kind of narrative did you think they'd play to.....And they are playing it and people see your actions and charges and say yep, just abuse of power.......
The feds turned down braggs case....James ran on get trump....Fani has made a debacle of Georgia......Biden made the docs case look political now too.......Feds were much more deliberate and the states are now looking amateurish and just feeding the fire.......Toss in the impeachments btw
Its like your saying We (dems) are a threat, loud and proud...
"Well in fact dems are trying to jail someone they don't want as president again...They've made no bones about it and of course the right and Trump use it to say you are abusing power and a threat to democracy.......
Its not dishonest spin, its how half the country is looking at your actions and words....'Get him, we can never allow Trump to be pres again"
Now Now, telling people what to think or say.....Another one of those progressive over reaches.....
Were you offended? Get over it, it a real world out there and everyone is not a progressive.... In fact, if dems are now just 25% of voter and progs are say half of that.......People are tired of your relentless lack of common sense....
Now, would it be better to let others have their opinions and debate on the merits....That is truly the American way....Progressives should get back to that....
Nah, Ill stick to the post....Progressives picked a really bad time to go to all the extremes they have.....And this just pointed out a couple.....
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174075383
Well in fact dems are trying to jail someone they don't want as president again...They've made no bones about it and of course the right and Trump use it to say you are abusing power and a threat to democracy.......
Things like th CO decision play right into it too......Truth is, you can't beat him on the issues, Biden is way under water on all but one.....So dems best hope is Trump beating himself, which he probably will do, but one never knows these days....
All roads lead back to income inequity........That 3 to 500 dollars is just to break even not get ahead......I think it went on to say most of the homeless were once in housing and lost it.....
So, think of the 65% who say the economy no longer works for them.....Have little to no savings, no emergency fund and are paying an average of 20% on their credit cards.....Leads to that unhappiness thingy.......
Katie had the math right (if you remember) but pundits fail to do it and therefore don't understand the modern economic situation...The millennial generation 'are doing the math....Back to that American dream death...
So, in summary, all to many are just a emergency away from homelessness.... Then the ability to get rehoused is beyond reach....
OK, Ill bite (dems this dems that ;) Quick comment......Progressives completely forget the sheer brutality of Hamas,,,,,,To the point they had youngsters backing Osama Bin Laden......Speaks volumes to the previous extremes argument........
Till Israel is willing to have a two state solution with Arab countries providing their security and monitor their aid and let them get their footing (which Hamas wont either)....It wont get any better.......Netanyahu will have to go to achieve that (not that I'm a Schumer fan) and Hamas too...
But you can't back people like Hamas or Bin laden.....And expect to have credibility.......
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/national-security-daily/2023/11/16/why-bin-ladens-letter-went-viral-on-tiktok-00127618
Understanding the horrors of war is a different subject all together,,,Someday the press will show the real images of it, not just talking the politics behind it.....Then and only then do we have a chance to bring the art of war to an end world wide...
Good for her,,,,, Hopefully it didn't go to the administrative crowd as most monies do....CA spent billions on homelessness, still getting worse.... Billions have been appropriated for the inner cities, wonder where it all went.....
California has spent billions to fight homelessness. The problem has gotten worse
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/11/us/california-homeless-spending/index.html
Updated 11:41 PM EDT, Tue July 11, 2023
Homelessness crisis in California worsens despite state spending billions to fight it
California has spent a stunning $17.5 billion trying to combat homelessness over just four years. But, in the same time frame, from 2018 to 2022, the state’s homeless population actually grew. Half of all Americans living outside on the streets, federal data shows, live in California.
Across the country, homelessness is on the rise. But California is adding more homeless people every year than any other state. More than 170,000 unhoused people now live here.
“The problem would be so much worse, absent these interventions,” Jason Elliott, senior adviser on homelessness to Gov. Gavin Newsom, told CNN. “And that’s not what people want to hear. I get it, we get it.”
But with $17.5 billion, the state could, theoretically, have just paid the rent for every unhoused person in California for those four years, even at the state’s high home costs.
“That is reductive … Perhaps that would work for me, because I don’t have significant behavioral health challenges.” said Elliott. “If two thirds of people on the streets right now are experiencing mental health symptoms, we can’t just pay their rent.”
A new study found most homeless people in California last had a home in California, dispelling the myth that people come to the state specifically for homeless help.
The admittedly reductive math would leave nearly $4 billion for services like mental health treatment. But even if California did want to pay rent for every homeless person, there just isn’t enough affordable housing to go around.
“We need 2.5 million more units in California,” said Elliott. “This is a problem that is decades and decades in the making because of policy choices that we’ve made. We are not blameless. And when I say we, I mean Republicans and Democrats alike.”
A total of $20.6 billion has been allocated through 2024 to combat homelessness. Nearly $4 billion went to local governments to spend on anti-homelessness initiatives. $3.7 billion went to a program called Project Homekey, which also funds local governments, but specifically to buy properties like motels and commercial buildings to turn into permanent, affordable housing. So far 13,500 units have been finished. “It’s not enough,” said Elliott. “But reversing the slide is the first step to creating an increase.”
Cristina Smith recently moved into one of the new affordable units in Los Angeles. After five years without a home she had, like many, given up hope. “I thought it was fake,” she told CNN affiliate KCBS. “Until they gave me the keys and then I was like this is real. You don’t believe it after a while.”
A further $2 billion from the huge pot went toward tax credits for developers to build affordable housing, which has seen 481 new units completed so far, with thousands more anticipated. Another $2 billion went to kick-start affordable housing projects, stalled by funding shortfalls. And nearly $2 billion was spent on emergency rental assistance.
California has, in recent years, suffered devastating wildfire seasons and, of course, the Covid pandemic. Both put extra pressure on housing.
“It’s frustrating, it’s frustrating … It’s frustrating for us,” said Elliott. “At the end of the day if we want to truly solve homelessness in America. We need to build more housing.”
Dr. Margot Kushel, who worked with Elliott to formulate a pandemic plan for the state’s homeless population, just published a hefty report, the results of a survey of nearly 3,200 unhoused people across California she hails as “the largest representative study of homelessness since the mid-1990s.” Kushel, who is director of the UCSF Center for Vulnerable Populations, was commissioned by the state to find out who is homeless in California and why, in the hope her data might help fine-tune the state’s response to what Newsom has called “a disgrace.”
Politicians, and many voters, want solutions. Newsom devoted his entire State of the State speech in 2020 to the issue. In a recent poll, 84% of Californians said they think homelessness is a “very serious problem.” In Los Angeles, the issue dominated last year’s mayoral race with the winner, Karen Bass, declaring a state of emergency on homelessness on her very first day in office.
Kushel’s report dispelled some myths. Number one, that many people on the street don’t want a home. Not true, says Kushel. “Participants overwhelmingly wanted permanent housing,” she concludes in the report.
Number two, that many people on the streets of California are not from California. There’s a widely held belief that many people become homeless elsewhere, and come to California for the weather and the more liberal approach to homelessness. And therefore, California does not owe them anything. Not true, says Kushel.
“Nine out of 10 people lost their stable housing here. These are Californians,” she said. “We have to create the housing for all Californians".
Myth number 3: that mental illness is the driving force behind homelessness. Yes, 66% of respondents did report, “symptoms of mental health conditions currently,” which is the statistic quoted by Elliott, the governor’s adviser, to argue a solution is more complicated than just writing rent checks. But Kushel questioned if mental health problems led to homelessness, or the other way round.
“Most of that, half of people, had severe depression or severe anxiety – not surprising if you were experiencing homelessness,” she said.
Still, tackling mental health issues among the unhoused is a major plank in the Newsom administration’s effort. “We’re taking a new approach,” he said last spring when unveiling his mental health plan, “Rather than reforming in the margins a system that is foundationally and fundamentally broken.”
Part of the new approach is, controversially, to effectively force some people into mental health help – allowing relatives, social services or medical personnel to refer people to be considered for a court-ordered treatment program.
“Just tackling the mental health side can’t solve the problem,” says Kushel. “Not when the median rent is $2,200 for a two-bedroom apartment.”
Which brings us back to the need for 2.5 million more homes. The state does have a plan to build them all by 2030. But here in California, like elsewhere, housing and zoning decisions are down to local governments.
“We’ve got communities in this state that are refusing to build low-income housing,” Elliott, the governor’s adviser, told CNN. “Because they say it’s all just rapists and child molesters. So that’s, that’s, that’s the dynamic that we’re facing, right?”
The state is suing a number of wealthier cities for thwarting the construction of affordable housing within their borders.
There aren’t enough affordable houses in California, therefore rents are too high.
“The primary problem for homelessness is economics,” said Kushel. “People just don’t have the money … to pay the rent.”
Dr. Margot Kushel said getting people into permanent housing -- not just off the street -- needs to be the focus.
Dr. Margot Kushel said getting people into permanent housing -- not just off the street -- needs to be the focus. CNN
So, how much money would people need to make up the shortfall and stay in their homes? “One of the surprising things was how optimistic people were that relatively small amounts of money would have prevented their homelessness,” Kushel said of the people surveyed. “For a lot of them, that $300 or $500 a month would do the trick.”
The Newsom administration is spending more to combat homelessness than this state ever has before. Prior to 2018 there was no coherent statewide plan or funding structure. But, they say, the state needs help. “The federal government needs to get in the game and do what it used to do, which is provide housing as a guarantee,” said Elliott. He says for every four Americans in need of a housing voucher, there is just one voucher available.
“Food stamps are a guarantee. Health care is a guarantee. Public education is a guarantee,” he said. “Housing? 25% chance. Spin the wheel.”
Asked how state officials have reacted to her report and recommendations, Kushel replied, “I think they’re on board. I hope, I think they’re relatively on board. I don’t agree with everything, but I think they’re trying.” Asked what she doesn’t agree with, Kushel demurred, “Oh, gosh, I don’t know. I mean, as you can hear, I really want to have a single-minded focus on getting people into permanent housing and I think that is the root of how we end homelessness.” She did agree some politicians might be more focused on the window dressing of getting people off the street, into shelters or motels, rather than actually into permanent housing.
“I couldn’t disagree more with that characterization,” said Elliott. “We’re facing a tidal wave and we’re doing the best we can – to mix metaphors a little bit – to paddle out from that and to try to tread water and do as best we can while we try to make the fundamental change necessary both in California and at the national level to truly address homelessness.”
In Los Angeles, the epicenter of the homelessness crisis in the Golden State, Mayor Bass launched a program called Inside Safe, to clear street encampments. At a roundtable with reporters recently, she was keen to trumpet the success of moving more than 1,300 people off the streets into motels but refused to even estimate how many of those people have been moved into permanent housing. The 2023-2024 city budget includes $250 million for Inside Safe. From the total, $110 million will be used to pay for temporary motels. $21 million will be used for permanent housing.
I know one woman in Los Angeles who was moved from a tent into a motel room nearly 200 days ago under Inside Safe. She is still there and says there is still not even a plan to move her into a permanent home. She says she’s frustrated and losing hope.
There is no silver bullet.
“They’re trying really hard to keep people alive,” said Kushel. “And they’re kind of stuck in this vicious cycle of not having the housing to send people to.”
Its also a lack of critical this thinking,,,,Im so caught up in being the member of a side,,,,,I can no longer think for myself or see with my own eyes....Please! Someone tell me what to think, Lol...(not aimed at you)
I never really considered the issue outta my general liberal stance for most things of "whatever".
The whole issue is a great example of overboard liberal thinking,,,,Progressives to be exact.....Civil rights has evened out quite well (note Mahers progressaphobia)and now progressives seem to have to go after more extreme things to be outraged about even breaking the point of common sense......
All the while the biggest issues the American public face are dismissed and even ignored....
To the trans rights bit in sports,,,,,,It works against women's rights they fought hard to attain....And libs helped them get there.....Similar to libs going against workers they once helped attain workers rights and equity to fall in line with corporate greed....Note also their extreme immigration stance has real consequences, not of bigotry, but ramifications in a modern world, now they feel it in the once protected cities............Crime is another issue, petty crime to be exact, decriminalize shoplifting and no bail and the cities are unbearable to the point of a business exodus......Look at the homelessness that now is prevalent,, now add evicted migrants..........It's all how we end up in the world as it sits today and the pumpers will twist any truth, bashers,, as always point out truths painted over that cost the many........Did I mention free speech? Here is one I saved for ya...........https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jk-rowlings-dehumanizing-misgendering-post-reported-to-uk-police-tv-personality-says/ar-BB1jwH6J
You spoke of happiness, note Gallop's Happiness ranking for the US now...
Call it the pendulum swing in all things, dems and progressives have gone to extremes counterintuitive to their old values.....Extremes beget extremes......