Deutsch
Français
Español
Italiano
Português
中文
日本語
Русский
Türkçe
Gov. Newsom Threat to Withold Federal Tax Payments - Analysis
Duration: 0:44
Views: 27
Submitted: 4 days ago
Submitted by:
Description:
Can he or not?
Not at all!
American government stalker State of California cannot legally withhold federal taxes or divert those funds to state programs like college funding. Here's why, along with constitutional and legal context and I JUST CHECKED IT MYSELF!
Key Legal & American Constitutional Barrier? Federal Tax Supremacy (Article VI, Supremacy Clause): Their Federal law is the "supreme Law of the Land." Federal tax statutes requiring withholding and remittance to the U.S. Treasury override any conflicting state law or action. What about their American “Federal Tax Collection System?” Employers and businesses act as agents of the IRS — not the state so when withholding federal income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes, they are legally obligated to remit these funds directly to the federal government.
California does not physically possess or control these funds; they flow from payers directly to the U.S. Treasury. Wait, what about Intergovernmental Tax Immunity? No go on that one either because American States cannot tax the federal government or interfere with its lawful revenue collection. Withholding federal taxes is precisely such interference. I just reviewed their American Specific Federal Statutes in this regard such as their “Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Sections 3402 & 3403” which mandates employer withholding and make the employer liable for sending the taxes to the IRS. In addition to thay, their IRC Section 7202” makes willful failure to collect or truthfully account for and pay over federal taxes a felony punishable by fines and imprisonment while “IRC Section 6672” imposes a "Trust Fund Recovery Penalty" on individuals (including potentially state officials) who willfully fail to collect, account for, or pay over withheld taxes. This penalty equals 100% of the unpaid trust fund taxes so as far as Newsom implying he might withhold the consequences of him even attempting to be withholding/diverting would result in immediate federal lawsuits as their U.S. Department of Justice would file for an injunction to stop the action immediately and that would be followed by “Criminal Prosecution” of Newsom because AmeriKKKan State officials involved would face felony charges under IRC 7202 while personal liability under their law would retroactively kick in and officials who withheld and or diverted would be held personally liable for the 100% penalty under IRC 6672. Trump can easily weaponize federal government and withhold billions in grants for California’s highways, Medicaid, education he is already pulling the plug on, and other critical programs California relies on.
But what if Newsom didn’t anyways? Then Trump would make use of their AmeriKKKan “Treasury Offset Program (TOP)” which means their American Federal Treasury could seize California's federal funds (like grants) to recover the entire withheld tax amounts Newsom either withheld or diverted… Furthermore, by their American Laws (Federal) which I just checked, their American IRS could place liens on state property of California and levy state bank accounts — no shit — which would cause economic chaos as employers in California would be caught in an impossible legal conflict, facing federal penalties for complying with an illegal state directive. This would severely damage California's business climate by the way far more than Elon hooked on Ketamine — lol! Legal Alternatives for Funding Colleges in California? While withholding federal taxes is impossible — Newsom’s California has legal options:
State Tax Increases: Raise state income, sales, or corporate taxes specifically earmarked for higher education. Budget Reallocation: Prioritize existing state general funds towards colleges and universities. Bond Measures: Seek voter approval for state bonds to fund college infrastructure/programs. Wealth Taxes/Fees: Explore constitutionally sound state-level wealth taxes, endowments taxes, or targeted fees (though these face their own legal challenges). Federal Advocacy: Lobby Congress for:
Increased federal grants for higher education.
Expansion of Pell Grants.
Student loan forgiveness programs.
Changes to federal funding formulas benefiting CA.
Optimize Existing Programs: Maximize efficiency in existing state higher ed funding and explore innovative cost-saving models.
Public-Private Partnerships: Foster partnerships with private industry to fund research, programs, and infrastructure.
The "College Access Tax Credit" Program (Existing Model)
California does have a program demonstrating a legal way to redirect some state tax dollars to colleges, not federal taxes:
Taxpayers can voluntarily donate to the California College Access Tax Credit Fund.
In return, they receive a state tax credit (reducing their state tax bill) equal to a portion (e.g., 60%) of their donation.
Crucially: This uses state tax credits to incentivize donations to a state fund; it does not touch federal taxes or interfere with federal collection. Federal taxes are still paid in full.
But withholding or diverting federal taxes is flatly illegal and unconstitutional and if Newsom did anyways to fuck with Trump the “Federal Forrest Gump” it would trigger swift, severe legal and financial consequences for California, all its officials who carried it out with Newsom and its businesses. The mechanisms of federal AmeriKKKan tax collection and the American Supremacy Clause leave no room for this action so California has no other choice but to perhaps follow up on one of my suggestions and pursue legal avenues just as I outlined —primarily through its own taxing, spending, and federal advocacy powers – to increase funding for its colleges and universities. The existing College Access Tax Credit program shows a legal alternative using state tax incentives but not AmeriKKKan federal tax diversion.
Time for both parties to stop bucking their stupid fuckin heads and in the interest of their Republic’s future agree to a mutually acceptable compromise…
But wait, what “if” California were to declare independence and leave the Union?
Great idea, right?
Not in the least because American State of California cannot legally secede from the United States to become an independent nation because despite American founding fathers being stone cold fuckin rebels like myself, secession is unconstitutional and prohibited under their U.S. law and Newsom would be facing “Constitutional & Legal Barriers” going back to again, their AmeriKkkan “Supremacy Clause” (See Article VI if you don’t believe me fuckhead!): Federal law is the "supreme Law of the Land," overriding state laws or actions attempting secession.
Texas v. White (1869): The Supreme Court ruled that states cannot unilaterally secede from the Union. The Constitution creates "an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States." Furthermore: their AmeriKKKan 14th Amendment: Affirms that all persons born in the U.S. are citizens of the nation first — not individual states so any secession would violate this federal compact. Moreover, AmeriKKKanz have on their law books “Treason & Sedition” Lawz which state: Organizing secession could be prosecuted as sedition (18 U.S.C. § 2384) or treason (Article III, Section 3) so under their AmeriKKKan Laws there just is no “Legal Pathway” but neither was there any when their founding fathers rebelled and declared independence — by the way… Their American Constitution provides no mechanism for any of their states to leave the Union. Attempts however would require either constitutional amendment (approved by 2/3 of Congress + 3/4 of states), or a national revolution/collapse of the federal government (not a legal process) so even if California passed a secession referendum which I don’t see at this time (e.g., via ballot initiative), their AmeriKKKan Congress would never approve it. What I am implying with great specificity is that no state delegation would support dismembering the U.S. but if any Governing body tried in a State level I think that would result in a Federal Military Response judging from how fast Trump’s Pentagonian bitch lapdog Pete Haggelseth declared portions of the U.S. border with Mexico military Base property just to have American soldiers patrol areas in New Mexico which also doubles penalties for illegals because when they enter USA unknowingly they enter a military fuckin base so stiff penalties under American Nazi Law as their military Base was ass yanked to target indigent undocumented the ooorest of the poor migrants! What a bunch of fuckin cowards federal Trump pigs are! Back to what I was explaining in regards to California declaring Independence, Trump Admin’s U.S. government would deploy federal law enforcement, National Guard (federalized), or military to enforce federal authority (as during the Civil War) so it would be a very quick end of any if ever declared and in addition there would be a profound “Economic Collapse” as well because California relies on federal funding (35% of its budget, including Medicare/Medicaid, highways, disaster relief), and also the loss of the U.S. dollar, trade barriers, and expulsion from federal systems (Social Security, banking, air traffic control) which would result in mass exodus of businesses and capital but here’s the kicker if my analysis, there would also be “International Isolation” due to the fact that no country would recognize an independent California without U.S. consent (risking trade wars with the U.S.) and my quickie analysis indicates that regions like Orange County, NAVY FAGGOT San Diego, or rural areas would resist secession, sparking internal conflict. WITHIN American “Historical Context” secession failed before as well so for example during their AmeriKKKan Civil War (1861–1865): The only attempt at secession led to war, defeat of seceding states, and reaffirmation that the Union is "perpetual” but there are some modern secession movement American groups like "Yes California" (pushing "Calexit") but they lack legal standing, popular support (Only 30% approval), and face active FBI monitoring as their WITT put bugs way up their asses… So any realistic alternatives for California’s autonomy Gov. Newsom can pursue? I think that California can achieve policy goals within the U.S. system with “State Legislation” as they pass laws exceeding federal standards (e.g., environmental regulations, minimum wage) and sue the federal government to block Trump’s policies (e.g., immigration enforcement) and collaborate with other states on shared goals (e.g., climate initiatives) and leverage California’s influence in Congress to shape federal policy which is the best Newsom’s alternative because aecession is legally impossible, politically unviable, and economically catastrophic for both Newsom and his Statemof California! Plain and simple, their U.S. Constitution forbids it, the Supreme Court has banned it, and history shows it leads to violent suppression so that is WHY I think California’s path to influence lies in using its economic and political power within the federal system — not in futile attempts to leave it. Movements advocating secession are symbolic protests, waste of FBI manpower and definitely not viable plans.
What I the God of Mathematical Science think of current Governor Newsom’s Trump Strategy?
It totally sucks because it targets Trump’s combative style and as such only results in adding fuel to his fire so in essence Gov Newsom is loading Trump’s Federal gun and holding a bullet which says Governor Eason of. California, very bad suicidal approach…
What I would do is minimize public confrontations with “his” American President Trump (or a future adversarial federal administration) through a liaison appointment essentially focusing on practicality and protecting California's interests and here would be my core strategy:
Deploy a high-level, discreet, and strategically positioned liaison to manage the relationship and to — get this good — “absorb friction” and protect California's priorities without escalating public spats cause both Trump and Gov Newsom are Americans fighting each other in public, so humiliating for their Nation! So what you want to do is select the “Right Liaison” based on proven Credibility & Trust (Bidirectional) so I would choose someone with established relationships (or the potential to build them) with key figures in the opposing administration/circle (e.g., former colleagues, respected bipartisan figures, pragmatic dealmakers) and that individual must be inherently credible and respected by both Sacramento and the relevant figures in the opposing camp in Washington so ideally someone who has deep federal experience (former Member of Congress, senior agency official, experienced federal lobbyist with bipartisan ties) but not a novice cause there would be no luxury of the learning curve flexibility on this one because the candidate has to hit the ground running so the right candidate will have appropriate “Temperament & Discretion” and must have either none or very low Ego, be high on patience and must tolerate difficult personalities while high IQ with ability to avoid taking all bait, “Master Negotiator” skilled in finding pragmatic solutions always separating personality from policy and capable of “Absolute Discretion” with proven ability to keep sensitive conversations confidential so no tell all books later, no video confessions, no leaks! Also “Calm Under Constant Fire” unflappable when faced with hostility or unreasonable demands, and someone who thrives in conflict but never surrenders when outnumbered, is completely “aligned with CA Goals” and deeply understands California's core priorities (general funding, education funding, disaster response, environmental reg’s, healthcare, immigration issues, etc.) and is completely loyal to the Governor Newsom’s objectives, even while being pragmatic.
Defining the Liaison's Role & Authority
Primary Channel: Designate the liaison as the exclusive, high-level point of contact for the Governor's office on matters involving the combative Oval Office ENTRAPPING Trump administration. Bypass traditional political channels prone to grandstanding.
So, Mission Clarity:
Prevent Escalation: Identify potential flashpoints early on and work behind the scenes to defuse them before they become public battles while you “Protect Resources” and focus relentlessly on securing federal funds (disaster relief, infrastructure, Medicaid) and preventing punitive actions (grant withholding, lawsuits) because tying up matters in Court is a WASTE OF PEOPLE’S TIME! Solve operational problems instead and address specific, non-ideological bureaucratic hurdles (permitting delays, grant administration issues, National Guard coordination). Then you must “Gauge Intent & Limits” by PROVIDING confidential, realistic assessments of the opposing administration's plans and room for negotiation with “Clear Boundaries” so not a policy debater because you want to avoid ideological arguments (climate, social issues) unless directly impacting vital state operations/funding so with Trump 2.0 wise thing to do is to stick to concrete, transactional issues. Candidate for this position cannot be a Spokesperson so what the Governor’s office would need to do is to keep the liaison out of the media spotlight because their work is “confidential diplomacy” NOT PUBLIC and there are two kinds…Authority Limits? Define precisely what the liaison can negotiate/agree to without gubernatorial sign-off (likely very little beyond process/communication) with major concessions of course ALL requiring Newsom's direct approval.
Next “Operational Execution?” Laser focus on proactive engagement (Not Reactive) so you simply have the liaison initiate regular, low-key check-ins with key contacts in the opposing administration (Chief of Staff, relevant agency heads, key advisors) to build rapport and identify issues early NOT LATER!
Focus initial outreach on non-controversial shared interests (disaster preparedness coordination, infrastructure project timelines, economic data sharing) until you gain trust of Trump Admin while you are absorbing the heat when tensions arise so the liaison serves as the first point of contact for complaints/attacks while COMPLETELY allowing Newsom to stay above the fray. They listen, acknowledge concerns (without necessarily agreeing), and seek clarification s my approach would be buffer, not echo chamber because the liaison filters inflammatory rhetoric away from the Governor while conveying necessary substance and public spat’s between Governor Newsom and Trump would be reduced 100%!
Structured communication to Newsom? Provide concise, actionable intelligence and options but not any venting nor PANTING! Focus on: "Here's the problem, here's their likely motivation, here are 1-3 potential paths forward, here are the risks/benefits of each” and you shield Newsom from unnecessary detail or provocation while building "Wins" so you Identify small, achievable areas for cooperation (e.g., expediting a specific FEMA reimbursement perhaps, resolving a discrete regulatory conflict for a CA business) to build trust and demonstrate the liaison's value to both sides while NONODY KNOWS ABIUT your stealth approach as you are de facto managing the public face which is strictly “Newsom's Role” not that of a liaison who deploys “Strategic Silence!” Newsom’s new role calls for lublicly avoiding direct personal criticism of Trump but you can still criticize policies forcefully when necessary, but avoid ad hominem attacks that trigger personal vendettas as you “Delegate Public Pushback” when public confrontation is unavoidable on core CA values, so stead of running your mouth you utilize the Lt. Governor, Attorney General, or legislative leaders as the primary public counter-voices and that way you keep the Governor focused on governance. You can credit your Liaison but only Privately to ensure the liaison knows their behind-the-scenes successes are valued internally, even if they can't be publicly celebrated so what you do is pick a candidate who is a master behind the scenes with strong personality and does not seek pitfalls of fame game so you can maintain CA's stance and I want to clarify that using a liaison doesn't mean capitulation in any way shape what so ever! Newsom publicly continues to champion CA's policies and legal rights while the liaison works pragmatically on specific, vital operational or funding issues.
My Perceived Key Risks & Mitigations:
Liaison Goes Native: Mitigation: Clear mandates, regular debriefs, choosing someone deeply rooted in CA interests.
Perception of Weakness: Mitigation: Newsom maintains strong public stance on policy; liaison focuses only on specific, vital operational/funding issues, not ideology.
Opposing Side Bypasses/Undermines Liaison: Mitigation: Newsom's office must consistently redirect contacts back to the liaison; demonstrate its effectiveness internally to the opposition through small wins.
Leaks: Mitigation: Choose someone with a proven record of discretion; keep the circle of knowledge very tight with all Voice calls, SMS, MMS, and Video conferences ENCRYPTED while messages automatically deleted after viewing…
Conclusion: My suggested approach is damage limitation and interest protection, not friendship with Trump! By appointing a skilled, discreet, and credible liaison focused on preventing escalation and securing tangible outcomes (especially funding and operational cooperation), Newsom can drastically reduce the oxygen for public feuds while safeguarding California's essential needs. It requires discipline from Newsom to avoid public baiting and trust in the liaison's confidential, pragmatic work. The goal isn't to agree, but to manage unavoidable conflict productively and protect YOUR STATE!
But is that all there is to this “Political Game?”
You mean, the “Gameplan?”
It’s MATHEMATICAL and at ALL TIMES — WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTIONS — EXACTLY what YOU make it to be and in this case you as a sitting Governor wants to act Presidential and appoint WISE MEN to HANDLE idiots so YOU can LASER-FOCUS on YOUR Presidential aspirations so basically you RIGHT NOW need to be aiming for Trump’s filthy ass and I just outlined in great detail Exactly how to do it while Governing with laser efficiency.
You know, on planet Earth there is over 200 Countries so why are you allowing one idiot in Washington to “Box you in” your own home State?
“Nothing Impossible…”
~Stateless Warrior
*Government agents of the State of California pitched me careers so I returned the favor while I pass on all their offers…
Not at all!
American government stalker State of California cannot legally withhold federal taxes or divert those funds to state programs like college funding. Here's why, along with constitutional and legal context and I JUST CHECKED IT MYSELF!
Key Legal & American Constitutional Barrier? Federal Tax Supremacy (Article VI, Supremacy Clause): Their Federal law is the "supreme Law of the Land." Federal tax statutes requiring withholding and remittance to the U.S. Treasury override any conflicting state law or action. What about their American “Federal Tax Collection System?” Employers and businesses act as agents of the IRS — not the state so when withholding federal income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes, they are legally obligated to remit these funds directly to the federal government.
California does not physically possess or control these funds; they flow from payers directly to the U.S. Treasury. Wait, what about Intergovernmental Tax Immunity? No go on that one either because American States cannot tax the federal government or interfere with its lawful revenue collection. Withholding federal taxes is precisely such interference. I just reviewed their American Specific Federal Statutes in this regard such as their “Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Sections 3402 & 3403” which mandates employer withholding and make the employer liable for sending the taxes to the IRS. In addition to thay, their IRC Section 7202” makes willful failure to collect or truthfully account for and pay over federal taxes a felony punishable by fines and imprisonment while “IRC Section 6672” imposes a "Trust Fund Recovery Penalty" on individuals (including potentially state officials) who willfully fail to collect, account for, or pay over withheld taxes. This penalty equals 100% of the unpaid trust fund taxes so as far as Newsom implying he might withhold the consequences of him even attempting to be withholding/diverting would result in immediate federal lawsuits as their U.S. Department of Justice would file for an injunction to stop the action immediately and that would be followed by “Criminal Prosecution” of Newsom because AmeriKKKan State officials involved would face felony charges under IRC 7202 while personal liability under their law would retroactively kick in and officials who withheld and or diverted would be held personally liable for the 100% penalty under IRC 6672. Trump can easily weaponize federal government and withhold billions in grants for California’s highways, Medicaid, education he is already pulling the plug on, and other critical programs California relies on.
But what if Newsom didn’t anyways? Then Trump would make use of their AmeriKKKan “Treasury Offset Program (TOP)” which means their American Federal Treasury could seize California's federal funds (like grants) to recover the entire withheld tax amounts Newsom either withheld or diverted… Furthermore, by their American Laws (Federal) which I just checked, their American IRS could place liens on state property of California and levy state bank accounts — no shit — which would cause economic chaos as employers in California would be caught in an impossible legal conflict, facing federal penalties for complying with an illegal state directive. This would severely damage California's business climate by the way far more than Elon hooked on Ketamine — lol! Legal Alternatives for Funding Colleges in California? While withholding federal taxes is impossible — Newsom’s California has legal options:
State Tax Increases: Raise state income, sales, or corporate taxes specifically earmarked for higher education. Budget Reallocation: Prioritize existing state general funds towards colleges and universities. Bond Measures: Seek voter approval for state bonds to fund college infrastructure/programs. Wealth Taxes/Fees: Explore constitutionally sound state-level wealth taxes, endowments taxes, or targeted fees (though these face their own legal challenges). Federal Advocacy: Lobby Congress for:
Increased federal grants for higher education.
Expansion of Pell Grants.
Student loan forgiveness programs.
Changes to federal funding formulas benefiting CA.
Optimize Existing Programs: Maximize efficiency in existing state higher ed funding and explore innovative cost-saving models.
Public-Private Partnerships: Foster partnerships with private industry to fund research, programs, and infrastructure.
The "College Access Tax Credit" Program (Existing Model)
California does have a program demonstrating a legal way to redirect some state tax dollars to colleges, not federal taxes:
Taxpayers can voluntarily donate to the California College Access Tax Credit Fund.
In return, they receive a state tax credit (reducing their state tax bill) equal to a portion (e.g., 60%) of their donation.
Crucially: This uses state tax credits to incentivize donations to a state fund; it does not touch federal taxes or interfere with federal collection. Federal taxes are still paid in full.
But withholding or diverting federal taxes is flatly illegal and unconstitutional and if Newsom did anyways to fuck with Trump the “Federal Forrest Gump” it would trigger swift, severe legal and financial consequences for California, all its officials who carried it out with Newsom and its businesses. The mechanisms of federal AmeriKKKan tax collection and the American Supremacy Clause leave no room for this action so California has no other choice but to perhaps follow up on one of my suggestions and pursue legal avenues just as I outlined —primarily through its own taxing, spending, and federal advocacy powers – to increase funding for its colleges and universities. The existing College Access Tax Credit program shows a legal alternative using state tax incentives but not AmeriKKKan federal tax diversion.
Time for both parties to stop bucking their stupid fuckin heads and in the interest of their Republic’s future agree to a mutually acceptable compromise…
But wait, what “if” California were to declare independence and leave the Union?
Great idea, right?
Not in the least because American State of California cannot legally secede from the United States to become an independent nation because despite American founding fathers being stone cold fuckin rebels like myself, secession is unconstitutional and prohibited under their U.S. law and Newsom would be facing “Constitutional & Legal Barriers” going back to again, their AmeriKkkan “Supremacy Clause” (See Article VI if you don’t believe me fuckhead!): Federal law is the "supreme Law of the Land," overriding state laws or actions attempting secession.
Texas v. White (1869): The Supreme Court ruled that states cannot unilaterally secede from the Union. The Constitution creates "an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States." Furthermore: their AmeriKKKan 14th Amendment: Affirms that all persons born in the U.S. are citizens of the nation first — not individual states so any secession would violate this federal compact. Moreover, AmeriKKKanz have on their law books “Treason & Sedition” Lawz which state: Organizing secession could be prosecuted as sedition (18 U.S.C. § 2384) or treason (Article III, Section 3) so under their AmeriKKKan Laws there just is no “Legal Pathway” but neither was there any when their founding fathers rebelled and declared independence — by the way… Their American Constitution provides no mechanism for any of their states to leave the Union. Attempts however would require either constitutional amendment (approved by 2/3 of Congress + 3/4 of states), or a national revolution/collapse of the federal government (not a legal process) so even if California passed a secession referendum which I don’t see at this time (e.g., via ballot initiative), their AmeriKKKan Congress would never approve it. What I am implying with great specificity is that no state delegation would support dismembering the U.S. but if any Governing body tried in a State level I think that would result in a Federal Military Response judging from how fast Trump’s Pentagonian bitch lapdog Pete Haggelseth declared portions of the U.S. border with Mexico military Base property just to have American soldiers patrol areas in New Mexico which also doubles penalties for illegals because when they enter USA unknowingly they enter a military fuckin base so stiff penalties under American Nazi Law as their military Base was ass yanked to target indigent undocumented the ooorest of the poor migrants! What a bunch of fuckin cowards federal Trump pigs are! Back to what I was explaining in regards to California declaring Independence, Trump Admin’s U.S. government would deploy federal law enforcement, National Guard (federalized), or military to enforce federal authority (as during the Civil War) so it would be a very quick end of any if ever declared and in addition there would be a profound “Economic Collapse” as well because California relies on federal funding (35% of its budget, including Medicare/Medicaid, highways, disaster relief), and also the loss of the U.S. dollar, trade barriers, and expulsion from federal systems (Social Security, banking, air traffic control) which would result in mass exodus of businesses and capital but here’s the kicker if my analysis, there would also be “International Isolation” due to the fact that no country would recognize an independent California without U.S. consent (risking trade wars with the U.S.) and my quickie analysis indicates that regions like Orange County, NAVY FAGGOT San Diego, or rural areas would resist secession, sparking internal conflict. WITHIN American “Historical Context” secession failed before as well so for example during their AmeriKKKan Civil War (1861–1865): The only attempt at secession led to war, defeat of seceding states, and reaffirmation that the Union is "perpetual” but there are some modern secession movement American groups like "Yes California" (pushing "Calexit") but they lack legal standing, popular support (Only 30% approval), and face active FBI monitoring as their WITT put bugs way up their asses… So any realistic alternatives for California’s autonomy Gov. Newsom can pursue? I think that California can achieve policy goals within the U.S. system with “State Legislation” as they pass laws exceeding federal standards (e.g., environmental regulations, minimum wage) and sue the federal government to block Trump’s policies (e.g., immigration enforcement) and collaborate with other states on shared goals (e.g., climate initiatives) and leverage California’s influence in Congress to shape federal policy which is the best Newsom’s alternative because aecession is legally impossible, politically unviable, and economically catastrophic for both Newsom and his Statemof California! Plain and simple, their U.S. Constitution forbids it, the Supreme Court has banned it, and history shows it leads to violent suppression so that is WHY I think California’s path to influence lies in using its economic and political power within the federal system — not in futile attempts to leave it. Movements advocating secession are symbolic protests, waste of FBI manpower and definitely not viable plans.
What I the God of Mathematical Science think of current Governor Newsom’s Trump Strategy?
It totally sucks because it targets Trump’s combative style and as such only results in adding fuel to his fire so in essence Gov Newsom is loading Trump’s Federal gun and holding a bullet which says Governor Eason of. California, very bad suicidal approach…
What I would do is minimize public confrontations with “his” American President Trump (or a future adversarial federal administration) through a liaison appointment essentially focusing on practicality and protecting California's interests and here would be my core strategy:
Deploy a high-level, discreet, and strategically positioned liaison to manage the relationship and to — get this good — “absorb friction” and protect California's priorities without escalating public spats cause both Trump and Gov Newsom are Americans fighting each other in public, so humiliating for their Nation! So what you want to do is select the “Right Liaison” based on proven Credibility & Trust (Bidirectional) so I would choose someone with established relationships (or the potential to build them) with key figures in the opposing administration/circle (e.g., former colleagues, respected bipartisan figures, pragmatic dealmakers) and that individual must be inherently credible and respected by both Sacramento and the relevant figures in the opposing camp in Washington so ideally someone who has deep federal experience (former Member of Congress, senior agency official, experienced federal lobbyist with bipartisan ties) but not a novice cause there would be no luxury of the learning curve flexibility on this one because the candidate has to hit the ground running so the right candidate will have appropriate “Temperament & Discretion” and must have either none or very low Ego, be high on patience and must tolerate difficult personalities while high IQ with ability to avoid taking all bait, “Master Negotiator” skilled in finding pragmatic solutions always separating personality from policy and capable of “Absolute Discretion” with proven ability to keep sensitive conversations confidential so no tell all books later, no video confessions, no leaks! Also “Calm Under Constant Fire” unflappable when faced with hostility or unreasonable demands, and someone who thrives in conflict but never surrenders when outnumbered, is completely “aligned with CA Goals” and deeply understands California's core priorities (general funding, education funding, disaster response, environmental reg’s, healthcare, immigration issues, etc.) and is completely loyal to the Governor Newsom’s objectives, even while being pragmatic.
Defining the Liaison's Role & Authority
Primary Channel: Designate the liaison as the exclusive, high-level point of contact for the Governor's office on matters involving the combative Oval Office ENTRAPPING Trump administration. Bypass traditional political channels prone to grandstanding.
So, Mission Clarity:
Prevent Escalation: Identify potential flashpoints early on and work behind the scenes to defuse them before they become public battles while you “Protect Resources” and focus relentlessly on securing federal funds (disaster relief, infrastructure, Medicaid) and preventing punitive actions (grant withholding, lawsuits) because tying up matters in Court is a WASTE OF PEOPLE’S TIME! Solve operational problems instead and address specific, non-ideological bureaucratic hurdles (permitting delays, grant administration issues, National Guard coordination). Then you must “Gauge Intent & Limits” by PROVIDING confidential, realistic assessments of the opposing administration's plans and room for negotiation with “Clear Boundaries” so not a policy debater because you want to avoid ideological arguments (climate, social issues) unless directly impacting vital state operations/funding so with Trump 2.0 wise thing to do is to stick to concrete, transactional issues. Candidate for this position cannot be a Spokesperson so what the Governor’s office would need to do is to keep the liaison out of the media spotlight because their work is “confidential diplomacy” NOT PUBLIC and there are two kinds…Authority Limits? Define precisely what the liaison can negotiate/agree to without gubernatorial sign-off (likely very little beyond process/communication) with major concessions of course ALL requiring Newsom's direct approval.
Next “Operational Execution?” Laser focus on proactive engagement (Not Reactive) so you simply have the liaison initiate regular, low-key check-ins with key contacts in the opposing administration (Chief of Staff, relevant agency heads, key advisors) to build rapport and identify issues early NOT LATER!
Focus initial outreach on non-controversial shared interests (disaster preparedness coordination, infrastructure project timelines, economic data sharing) until you gain trust of Trump Admin while you are absorbing the heat when tensions arise so the liaison serves as the first point of contact for complaints/attacks while COMPLETELY allowing Newsom to stay above the fray. They listen, acknowledge concerns (without necessarily agreeing), and seek clarification s my approach would be buffer, not echo chamber because the liaison filters inflammatory rhetoric away from the Governor while conveying necessary substance and public spat’s between Governor Newsom and Trump would be reduced 100%!
Structured communication to Newsom? Provide concise, actionable intelligence and options but not any venting nor PANTING! Focus on: "Here's the problem, here's their likely motivation, here are 1-3 potential paths forward, here are the risks/benefits of each” and you shield Newsom from unnecessary detail or provocation while building "Wins" so you Identify small, achievable areas for cooperation (e.g., expediting a specific FEMA reimbursement perhaps, resolving a discrete regulatory conflict for a CA business) to build trust and demonstrate the liaison's value to both sides while NONODY KNOWS ABIUT your stealth approach as you are de facto managing the public face which is strictly “Newsom's Role” not that of a liaison who deploys “Strategic Silence!” Newsom’s new role calls for lublicly avoiding direct personal criticism of Trump but you can still criticize policies forcefully when necessary, but avoid ad hominem attacks that trigger personal vendettas as you “Delegate Public Pushback” when public confrontation is unavoidable on core CA values, so stead of running your mouth you utilize the Lt. Governor, Attorney General, or legislative leaders as the primary public counter-voices and that way you keep the Governor focused on governance. You can credit your Liaison but only Privately to ensure the liaison knows their behind-the-scenes successes are valued internally, even if they can't be publicly celebrated so what you do is pick a candidate who is a master behind the scenes with strong personality and does not seek pitfalls of fame game so you can maintain CA's stance and I want to clarify that using a liaison doesn't mean capitulation in any way shape what so ever! Newsom publicly continues to champion CA's policies and legal rights while the liaison works pragmatically on specific, vital operational or funding issues.
My Perceived Key Risks & Mitigations:
Liaison Goes Native: Mitigation: Clear mandates, regular debriefs, choosing someone deeply rooted in CA interests.
Perception of Weakness: Mitigation: Newsom maintains strong public stance on policy; liaison focuses only on specific, vital operational/funding issues, not ideology.
Opposing Side Bypasses/Undermines Liaison: Mitigation: Newsom's office must consistently redirect contacts back to the liaison; demonstrate its effectiveness internally to the opposition through small wins.
Leaks: Mitigation: Choose someone with a proven record of discretion; keep the circle of knowledge very tight with all Voice calls, SMS, MMS, and Video conferences ENCRYPTED while messages automatically deleted after viewing…
Conclusion: My suggested approach is damage limitation and interest protection, not friendship with Trump! By appointing a skilled, discreet, and credible liaison focused on preventing escalation and securing tangible outcomes (especially funding and operational cooperation), Newsom can drastically reduce the oxygen for public feuds while safeguarding California's essential needs. It requires discipline from Newsom to avoid public baiting and trust in the liaison's confidential, pragmatic work. The goal isn't to agree, but to manage unavoidable conflict productively and protect YOUR STATE!
But is that all there is to this “Political Game?”
You mean, the “Gameplan?”
It’s MATHEMATICAL and at ALL TIMES — WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTIONS — EXACTLY what YOU make it to be and in this case you as a sitting Governor wants to act Presidential and appoint WISE MEN to HANDLE idiots so YOU can LASER-FOCUS on YOUR Presidential aspirations so basically you RIGHT NOW need to be aiming for Trump’s filthy ass and I just outlined in great detail Exactly how to do it while Governing with laser efficiency.
You know, on planet Earth there is over 200 Countries so why are you allowing one idiot in Washington to “Box you in” your own home State?
“Nothing Impossible…”
~Stateless Warrior
*Government agents of the State of California pitched me careers so I returned the favor while I pass on all their offers…
Categories:
People and Blogs
