For now. trump has no one to blame except himself. The ban will eventually pass pass but ol donnie is having a rough week. All of this could've have been avoided if donnie would just FUCKING FOCUS, massage,reword the executive order, why so quick to please your base. I wonder if Rudy Giuliani will go by the Chris Christie route...and if Giuliani is subpoenaed, oh boy.
I would suggest he thread lightly!
against the 3 panel members of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
No doubt Trump's tweets and abrasive public statements (especially as candidate) influenced the 3 panel members. Their dislike for Trump's statements was quite obvious. Too bad they don't know how to be judges and are even believers in fake news.
that they get impeached before Trump? 
No doubt that non-lawyers shouldn't try and debate the law with high-up judges - this includes Trump
No doubt that Trump lashes out against everyone who doesn't agree w/him such as Blumenthal
No doubt that Trump's just making shit up when he denies what Gorsuch said to Blumenthal
No doubt that Trump is demonstrating his narcissi on a daily basis
Is asking him to STFU really just a precursor to asking him to resign? I have long stated (since he first announce his candidacy) that Trump's narcissism and ego could potentially become dramatically disastrous but his detractors partisan excesses could very well result in a self fulfilling prophesy.
I haven't had time to research. Have we heard from Gorsuch, what he said to Blumenthal?
BTW, Trump's lawyers did a mediocre job.
I was replying to your point which was:
"No doubt Trump's tweets and abrasive public statements (especially as candidate) influenced the 3 panel members. Their dislike for Trump's statements was quite obvious. Too bad they don't know how to be judges and are even believers in fake news."
It's a bad game-plan to criticize the referee (judges).
Is that some kind of legal jargon? Did you learn that from watching judge judy or was it in one of your marvel comic books.
I hope you do not STFU cause you are entertaining and fun to laugh at.
Trump's not a lawyer. (I'm not a lawyer). He wants to debate the law with Circuit Court judges - laughable. Maybe if he had consulted with his lawyers, rather than Bannon and Kushner, he wouldn't have gotten himself into this mess
Actually, you make a good point re: Judge Judy! Trump spends half his life watching TV - maybe he got his legal training from Judy?! - whattaya think?!
this was a poorly written executive order executed by inexperience lawyers and signed by a buffoon....
It was as if trump tried to be putin...no due process, only I/trump decide who stays. Rewriting and presented it now "might" work.He's slowly loosing credibility......hey how's that wall coming???
Plus the Trump administration and DOJ made all kinds of unforced errors, so I agree with the essence of some of your points.
BUT. . . .
The fact that any federal judge believes they can substitute their thinking on national security for any President should scare the hell out of you.
Trump should withdraw the EO, rewrite it and issue it again tomorrow. He could pull every tooth from the 9th's overbite. If he does not it would then seem he'd rather have the issue/conflict than results.
-- Modified on 2/9/2017 9:06:18 PM
The wording would have to eliminate alot of the Putism that's on there. To rewrite it might take away from what trumps' ego has on it. Would trump allow an new EO to take away from his ego, I don't know.
Plus he'll have to sell it as why the New Order is different then what was rejected and the SC would just assume not to hear it, it's one of those, been there heard that. It's a long shot, but this decision might stand..
The law and the Constitution are on his side. He will eventually prevail, probably 8-0 in the SCOTUS.
For now. trump has no one to blame except himself. The ban will eventually pass pass but ol donnie is having a rough week. All of this could've have been avoided if donnie would just FUCKING FOCUS, massage,reword the executive order, why so quick to please your base. I wonder if Rudy Giuliani will go by the Chris Christie route...and if Giuliani is subpoenaed, oh boy.
A President trashing a major retailer for dropping his daughter's brand of clothing? His Adviser defending him and telling Americans to buy her brand from the "White House"!
Where are your tax returns?
If this crook is not impeached within the next 6 months, this country is another Somalia!
"SEE YOU IN COURT". What a clown! He got his fucking ass kicked in a COURT!
"We need ban for 90 days to see WTF is up." He coulda looked at WTF is up w/o ban. The number of refugees etc. from these 7 countries who have created terrorist acts in this country = 0. No imminent danger at all
Now, Trump has to wait 90 days or so before this case gets to Supreme Court, Donald can begin today to see WTF is up.....but, he won't....
The asshole will get the same ruling from the Supreme Court. All the terrorist acts since 9/11 were committed by American Citizens using Assault weapons in political rallies, schools, movie theaters, shopping malls, churches, temples, hospitals and courts.
I'll assume you meant to say"All terrorist acts 'in the U.S.' were committed by American Citizens."
Even so, your statement would be factually incorrect. As just one example look up "Tashfeen Malik".
Tashfeen Malik was born in Chicago and was an American Citizen. Do you even know that anyone born in the US is an American Citizen irrespective of their parent's race, religion and national origin?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rizwan_Farook_and_Tashfeen_Malik
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/06/us/san-bernardino-shooter-tashfeen-malik/
-- Modified on 2/9/2017 8:47:25 PM
Hey pal, talk about her husband. He was the mastermind. She was an accomplice. So, why did not your Clown ban people from Pakistan? He has business interests in Pakistan.
The Clown is using the office of President to promote his business, not your job, not your safety and definitely not your healthcare.
why would I even consider you might have enough respect for me to have a dialog. He might be your clown but love him or hate him, he's my President. No, your motives here source from elsewhere. I seriously doubt you think I'm your pal.
BTW, why change the subject without even acknowledging your error? If you were so wrong about her origin how can you trust yourself now about the rest of what you think you know about them? More dis-ingenuousness proving you're not worth my time. When proven wrong you simply ignore facts and move on to another untruth.
"No evidence that any alien from any of these 7 countries perpetuated a terrorist attack in the States." (Pakistan isn't one of these 7 countries"
The government has not shown that a stay is necessary to avoid irreparable injury. ... Despite the district court’s and our own repeated invitations to explain the urgent need for the executive order to be placed immediately into effect, the government submitted no evidence to rebut the states’ argument that the district court’s order merely returned the nation temporarily to the position it has occupied for many previous years. The government has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States."
Since when is any Judicial branch member more qualified than the entire Executive branch to make logical decisions regarding any national security issue? Answer, they aren't. The President does not need to proven anything to the Judicial branch whether his decision is or is not likely to prevent an attack from outside our borders. There are very narrow Constitutional tests they can apply, the strongest of which they knew wouldn't fly so they never even asserted it, that being the religious test.
And on top of that, the 9th Circuit was WRONG in making the statement you quoted. Case in point, the Ohio State University stabber was from Somalia. Shame on the DOJ for not being prepared well enough to make the appropriate counter to their fallacious statement. Shame on President Trump for picking this fight before he had an Attorney General in place he could trust and for not yet having a Solicitor General and for not having a team well enough prepared.
Yea, all of that. He and his team were ignorant and ill prepared, that's their excuse. They are new and paid a political price for it but what excuse does this Court have for thinking they know better than the Constitutional Commander in Chief as to what's best for national security? None. Why should the court's reasoning in that quote be made the standard for setting our defenses? If the executive thinks there is a danger they do not need to prove it to any court. Supposedly the court's decision was only on the question of standing and not the merits but to issue a TRO the court is supposed to believe the plaintiff will likely prevail on the merits.
You guys are frightened that Trump has this type of power. You should be scared to death that the 9th Circuit Court thinks it knows best regarding national security. You may agree with them on this narrow issue but that is not the point. Do you really want to turn over national security to the un-elected in government?
Even the major news sources qualify their report of "ZERO from the 7" a variety of ways, mostly by saying "no major fatal attacks" (not sure what a minor fatal attack would be), or none since 9/11 (not sure what a look back to 9/11 adds to the significance) or refugees only examined vs non-refugees.
Just as one example, the Ohio State stabber was from Somalia. No one other than him was killed so it's all cool.
This is patiently false. They release the names of 24 arrested for terrorism from these countries since 911.
Catch up.
What actual lawyers, including major left wing lawyers have stated is that the President has near complete authority to do what he did. These judges didn't say the ban was illegal, because they couldn't, they said they wanted to see more paperwork about it.
What I don't get is why you libs care about this. So a few people that have never been in the states can't come here for a few months. So what. They still won't be able to come, and if they do, they aren't getting out of the airports. He doesn't need an EO to keep them at the airports. This only effects people in the pipe line anyway. On day one of the new administration, the visa program was altered all new people applying will be vetted the way the admin wants.
The best part of this is the libs are killing themselves with this. Normal everyday Americans can clearly see that his actions are based on securing our safety. They instinctively know that it's a good idea. People (regressives) continue to make themselves look absurd.
Now, Trump has to wait 90 days or so before this case gets to Supreme Court, Donald can begin today to see WTF is up.....but, he won't....
Problem is: Normal everyday Americans (or, even the Pres) can't ban people from entering the US based on intuition.
We have a constitution. And, an XO as far reaching as this one requires a factual foundation to be considered warranted.
The Supreme court will decide.
You are flat out WRONG.
He can absolutely ban people he deems a threat to national security. That's the LAW. It's CRYSTAL CLEAR.
It requires ZERO factual foundation for his actions. The power is his and his alone.
Yes the supreme court may decide. I can almost guarantee that It'll be 8-0. People that don't see this/can't see that this ruling leads to a whole host of issues that are far bigger then a few people from a few countries. The ruling could be read that everyone in the world has rights in our nation. This isn't a close decision.
We have a constitution. And, an XO as far reaching as this one requires a factual foundation to be considered warranted.
The Supreme court will decide.
oye. You do realize he was not elected king, right? Despite your passionate denial, the POTUS actually is bound by the Constitution, and his actions are reviewable by the judicial branch of the govt.
For T, after so many years of running a privately held family biz in which he could do anything he wanted, with an expectation of no publicly voiced dissent (and even if/or someone did he could simply fire them), the bureaucratic contraints of the Presidency appear to be presenting a steep learning curve.
OK, Show us where in the Constitution that prevents him from halting entry of non-citizens and non-residents, people that have never been to the U.S. before. The original EO was poorly worded so non-residents with green cards that were returning got caught up. After a day or two they were all screened and allowed in. Unfortunately the 9th Circuit seemed to ignore that fix. The 9th circuit is claiming Trump must show that the total foreigners (for lack of a better term) are a proven danger based on past history from these countries. He actually could have done that but his lawyers screwed up, but the bottom line is he does not have to show this. He's the Commander in Chief which give him broad unwritten powers, plus there is a law that allows it. Nothing in the Constitution prevents this.
You disagree so now it's time to ante up.
This fact has been plainly demonstrated by 4 fed Judges, so far.
The president is not free to do whatever the fuck he wants, based on whatever subjective judgement he believes is right---with zero accountability, or review. There are built-in checks and balances in our govt. If the DOJ chooses to continue fighting to keep this XO, it will likely end up in the Supreme court, where the merits and constitutionality of the order, itself, will be determined.
Again---he's the President, not the King.
OK, Show us where in the Constitution that prevents him from halting entry of non-citizens and non-residents, people that have never been to the U.S. before. The original EO was poorly worded so non-residents with green cards that were returning got caught up. After a day or two they were all screened and allowed in. Unfortunately the 9th Circuit seemed to ignore that fix. The 9th circuit is claiming Trump must show that the total foreigners (for lack of a better term) are a proven danger based on past history from these countries. He actually could have done that but his lawyers screwed up, but the bottom line is he does not have to show this. He's the Commander in Chief which give him broad unwritten powers, plus there is a law that allows it. Nothing in the Constitution prevents this.
You disagree so now it's time to ante up.
The POTUS IS free to do whatever the fuck he wants as long as he stays within the confines of the Constitution and whatever statutes are in force. You and the 9th Circuit Court do have something in common. It seems you both think the Courts are free to do whatever the fuck they want and you both see the world the way you wish it to be not the way it really is.
I'll take your lack of response as your confession that you have no clue what part of the Constitution you think Trump may have violated.
-- Modified on 2/11/2017 3:36:04 AM
The POTUS has broad powers as long as he stays within the confines of the Constitution. And, the question of whether this immigration ban violates the constitution is exactly what is in question.
At this particular point in time, the only way the POTUS could do exactly whatever the fuck he wants would be to violate the Fed court order. The fact that there is a court order is irrefutable proof that decisions made by the POTUS are subject to review by the Judicial branch. We are watching checks and balances in action---this is a good thing.
There are valid arguments on both sides of this question. Instead of accusing me (incorrectly) of doing what you ARE doing, why don’t you stop playing armchair constitutional attorney? Again, the courts will decide.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/legal-arguments-trumps-immigration-ban/
I'll take your lack of response as your confession that you have no clue what part of the Constitution you think Trump may have violated.
-- Modified on 2/11/2017 3:36:04 AM
@TER reviewer. You didn't give Malaria 10/10? Is your name Gonzalo? Or, Mohammad?