Originally Posted by Guest

And where is the casual relationship between immigrants from any of these countries on Trump's lists and actual terrorist attacks? Trump is just playing on racism and fear of Muslims.

Hey Dumb @ss, Muslim is NOT a race. WOW, you insisted that you were educated..

You idiots hate the fact that he is trying to protect you. Who will you blame when we have another terrorist attack on American soil? BUSH?

Originally Posted by Guest

Hey Dumb @ss, Muslim is NOT a race. WOW, you insisted that you were educated..

You idiots hate the fact that he is trying to protect you. Who will you blame when we have another terrorist attack on American soil? BUSH?

Trump's Muslim ban is a dangerous distraction | | Al Jazeera

Trump is making things far worse.

Originally Posted by Guest

Trump's Muslim ban is a dangerous distraction | | Al Jazeera

Trump is making things far worse.

Oh, so you quote from a terrorist organization flagship news media. Wow, whodafigured?

Is that how you answer your big screwup when you accused him of being racist against Muslims......

Hopefully, the next terrorist incident will have dumb @ss leftards like you as victims instead of those that have supported national security. You folks hate America so much that you would rather invite the enemy in and surrender to them, than to defend your country. I bet you have a bit of French in your gene pool, right?

Originally Posted by Guest

Well well well. Look who the Hawaii judge met with before ruling against Trump's executive order

Yobama!

Originally Posted by Guest

Trump's Muslim ban is a dangerous distraction | | Al Jazeera

Trump is making things far worse.

Authentication?
Al Jazzeera?

Originally Posted by Guest

National Security from a man who seems to have worked in conjunction with Russia to tip an election for him? That's rich.

Why is it that the left is jumping all over the fact that there has been no proof (yet) of wire tapping of the president by the former Obama administration, but they keep harping about Russian ties when it has been definitely stated by pretty much all of the intelligent agencies that there was no such collusion.

And again, think about the fact that if there was something that the president wanted to do with regards to national security that you believe strongly in or that has been proven without a doubt, a lower level appointed judge could stop it from happening.

What if this judge came in and put a freeze on one of President Obama's executive orders?

We have to get above politics and look at this as an issue of national security and a properly functioning government.

Just because you agree with this guy's decision, doesn't mean that the procedure is the right way for us to operate. I don't believe that the system of checks and balances includes lower courts. If an executive order is to be challenged, and halted, it should be done so by a majority vote of the USSJC, not one individual lower level presidential appointee.

Forget about your own viewpoint and look at the system and procedure being established here.

Originally Posted by Guest

Why is it that the left is jumping all over the fact that there has been no proof (yet) of wire tapping of the president by the former Obama administration, but they keep harping about Russian ties when it has been definitely stated by pretty much all of the intelligent agencies that there was no such collusion.

And again, think about the fact that if there was something that the president wanted to do with regards to national security that you believe strongly in or that has been proven without a doubt, a lower level appointed judge could stop it from happening.

What if this judge came in and put a freeze on one of President Obama's executive orders?

We have to get above politics and look at this as an issue of national security and a properly functioning government.

Just because you agree with this guy's decision, doesn't mean that the procedure is the right way for us to operate. I don't believe that the system of checks and balances includes lower courts. If an executive order is to be challenged, and halted, it should be done so by a majority vote of the USSJC, not one individual lower level presidential appointee.

Forget about your own viewpoint and look at the system and procedure being established here.

Senate intelligence leaders say they have no evidence Trump was surveilled - The Washington Post

Donald Trump is a pathological liar who has shown he is a man with few ethical qualms. It goes to his character. President Obama in comparison is a lot more truthful according to objective followers of politics. Barack Obama's file | PolitiFact

Donald Trump's file | PolitiFact

Originally Posted by Guest

First of all, it's not unconstitutional. It wouldn't be unconstitutional even it it were based on religions, which it is not.

But the real issue here is, should an appointed lower level judge be able to undermine the nations security?

You may want to argue whether or not this is about the nations security and that's fine, but if this is allowed then any lower level judge could prevent our nation from being attacked by freezing an order that you might agree with. That should not be how we work as a country.

Maybe we should eliminate the judical system, what you want is a dictatorship. Take comrade trump with you as you leave for russia.

Originally Posted by Guest

Why is it that the left is jumping all over the fact that there has been no proof (yet) of wire tapping of the president by the former Obama administration, but they keep harping about Russian ties when it has been definitely stated by pretty much all of the intelligent agencies that there was no such collusion.

And again, think about the fact that if there was something that the president wanted to do with regards to national security that you believe strongly in or that has been proven without a doubt, a lower level appointed judge could stop it from happening.

What if this judge came in and put a freeze on one of President Obama's executive orders?

We have to get above politics and look at this as an issue of national security and a properly functioning government.

Just because you agree with this guy's decision, doesn't mean that the procedure is the right way for us to operate. I don't believe that the system of checks and balances includes lower courts. If an executive order is to be challenged, and halted, it should be done so by a majority vote of the USSJC, not one individual lower level presidential appointee.

Forget about your own viewpoint and look at the system and procedure being established here.

One at a time....

1. "Why is it that the left is jumping all over the fact that there has been no proof (yet) of wire tapping of the president by the former Obama administration, but they keep harping about Russian ties when it has been definitely stated by pretty much all of the intelligent agencies that there was no such collusion. "

You forget where this started and how it all began. President of the USA made a public and extremely serious charge of a felony by the past President with no even hint of proof. This was begun by Trump.

Nobody is harping over Russian ties to Trump. The investigation is about Russian involvement in our election process.

These are two huge, major things then add a National Security Advisor being forced to resign because he is a foreign agent....the many multi personal ties to Russia. Actually, this is all Trumps creation.

2. "And again, think about the fact that if there was something that the president wanted to do with regards to national security that you believe strongly in or that has been proven without a doubt, a lower level appointed judge could stop it from happening.

What if this judge came in and put a freeze on one of President Obama's executive orders?

We have to get above politics and look at this as an issue of national security and a properly functioning government.

Just because you agree with this guy's decision, doesn't mean that the procedure is the right way for us to operate. I don't believe that the system of checks and balances includes lower courts. If an executive order is to be challenged, and halted, it should be done so by a majority vote of the USSJC, not one individual lower level presidential appointee.


If this ban was for national security would not Turkey and Saudi Arabia be part of it ? They have been the origin of almost all the terrorist attacks in this country done by immigrants to this country.

Secondly, if you read the ruling, you will find that once again this is a creation of Donald Trump. I am not a constitutional lawyer but the Presidents own words are now being used and rationally the court is correct. He said what he wanted to ban over and over and over again...he made that his intent. Had he not mouthed off once again, I think this last one might well have been approved and still might be on appeal, BUT THIS IS AGAIN A CREATION OF TRUMP.

Originally Posted by Guest

Well well well. Look who the Hawaii judge met with before ruling against Trump's executive order

OMG!!!!

This is FAKE NEWS!!!!! Never happened....

Check your sources.

Originally Posted by Guest

Why is it that the left is jumping all over the fact that there has been no proof (yet) of wire tapping of the president by the former Obama administration, but they keep harping about Russian ties when it has been definitely stated by pretty much all of the intelligent agencies that there was no such collusion.

And again, think about the fact that if there was something that the president wanted to do with regards to national security that you believe strongly in or that has been proven without a doubt, a lower level appointed judge could stop it from happening.

What if this judge came in and put a freeze on one of President Obama's executive orders?

We have to get above politics and look at this as an issue of national security and a properly functioning government.

Just because you agree with this guy's decision, doesn't mean that the procedure is the right way for us to operate. I don't believe that the system of checks and balances includes lower courts. If an executive order is to be challenged, and halted, it should be done so by a majority vote of the USSJC, not one individual lower level presidential appointee.

Forget about your own viewpoint and look at the system and procedure being established here.

"harping about Russian ties when it has been definitely stated by pretty much all of the intelligent agencies that there was no such collusion."

trump people meeting with russian officials, I guess they were comparing trump vodka to russian.

"U.S. intelligence agencies, which released a report in January declaring that “Putin and the Russian government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary [Hillary] Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.”

Sessions breaks with intelligence agencies, says he doesn’t know if Russia wanted Trump to win - The Washington Post

Originally Posted by Guest

"harping about Russian ties when it has been definitely stated by pretty much all of the intelligent agencies that there was no such collusion."

trump people meeting with russian officials, I guess they were comparing trump vodka to russian.

"U.S. intelligence agencies, which released a report in January declaring that “Putin and the Russian government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary [Hillary] Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.”

Sessions breaks with intelligence agencies, says he doesn’t know if Russia wanted Trump to win - The Washington Post

Sessions is pretty much in Trump's corner in this fight.

Originally Posted by Guest

And where is the casual relationship between immigrants from any of these countries on Trump's lists and actual terrorist attacks? Trump is just playing on racism and fear of Muslims.

Actually the list of countries was compiled by the Obama administration as being a threat to the US.

Originally Posted by Guest

One at a time....

1. "Why is it that the left is jumping all over the fact that there has been no proof (yet) of wire tapping of the president by the former Obama administration, but they keep harping about Russian ties when it has been definitely stated by pretty much all of the intelligent agencies that there was no such collusion. "

You forget where this started and how it all began. President of the USA made a public and extremely serious charge of a felony by the past President with no even hint of proof. This was begun by Trump.

Nobody is harping over Russian ties to Trump. The investigation is about Russian involvement in our election process.

These are two huge, major things then add a National Security Advisor being forced to resign because he is a foreign agent....the many multi personal ties to Russia. Actually, this is all Trumps creation.

2. "And again, think about the fact that if there was something that the president wanted to do with regards to national security that you believe strongly in or that has been proven without a doubt, a lower level appointed judge could stop it from happening.

What if this judge came in and put a freeze on one of President Obama's executive orders?

We have to get above politics and look at this as an issue of national security and a properly functioning government.

Just because you agree with this guy's decision, doesn't mean that the procedure is the right way for us to operate. I don't believe that the system of checks and balances includes lower courts. If an executive order is to be challenged, and halted, it should be done so by a majority vote of the USSJC, not one individual lower level presidential appointee.


If this ban was for national security would not Turkey and Saudi Arabia be part of it ? They have been the origin of almost all the terrorist attacks in this country done by immigrants to this country.

Secondly, if you read the ruling, you will find that once again this is a creation of Donald Trump. I am not a constitutional lawyer but the Presidents own words are now being used and rationally the court is correct. He said what he wanted to ban over and over and over again...he made that his intent. Had he not mouthed off once again, I think this last one might well have been approved and still might be on appeal, BUT THIS IS AGAIN A CREATION OF TRUMP.

First, if you've read all of the posts in this thread you'll see that several people have been bringing up the fallacy that President Trump has ties to Russia.

The national security advisor was not a foreign agent. He did some work for a Turkish/American businessman and because there may have ben a hint of impropriety, he resigned.

As to the countries included in the ban, the list was compiled by the Obama administration as countries that posed a danger to the US.

The fact that the courts have looked at President Trump's words during the election and did not make a ruling based strictly on the contents of the order and the law is precisely what is wrong with the ruling and the reason that it will eventually get over turned.

Originally Posted by Guest

First, if you've read all of the posts in this thread you'll see that several people have been bringing up the fallacy that President Trump has ties to Russia.

The national security advisor was not a foreign agent. He did some work for a Turkish/American businessman and because there may have ben a hint of impropriety, he resigned.

As to the countries included in the ban, the list was compiled by the Obama administration as countries that posed a danger to the US.

The fact that the courts have looked at President Trump's words during the election and did not make a ruling based strictly on the contents of the order and the law is precisely what is wrong with the ruling and the reason that it will eventually get over turned.

Again one at a time...

1. If you are using TOTV posts to substantiate your claim you are TERRIBLY misguided. That is like saying "ALL Democrats are..." or "all liberals ate..". Since I have referenced your point, allow me to speak for myself and my memory of posts on here.

I NEVER ever one time said anything other than he has FINANCIAL TIES of major proportions to Russia. THAT is a fact. The investigation on Russia involvement surely has/will touch on that, and again, that investigation is about Russia insolvent and attempt to interfere in a US election. Does his refusal to share income tax info add to that...yes, because as you know, US lenders have for years refused to lend him money, and should he be deeply indebted to ANY foreign country, his tax statement would reveal that.

The National Security Advisor was in the process of registering as a lobbyist for a foreign interest, AND was fired for lying to the Vice President about phone calls between he and Russia.

A number (in excess of 6) of Trump team members had close, not casual, but very close ties not only to Russia, but to Putin

With all of that, I would think you would be happy that the USA intelligence might look into that while investigating KNOWN verifiable attempts at interfering in our election.

2. As far as the countries on the banned list, yes they came from a list of countries compiled by the Obama administration as dangerous places to visit, and in addition they added a few more steps to our vetting. The ban did not include the countries from which most terror has come from...Saudi Arabia and Turkey as two examples. Initially our President said these were countries that Obama identified for banning, then he said they were the worst terror countries. In any case, there was a list, but misrepresented by Trump.

3. I do not think the fact that what a President says has consequences has sunk in to him or you. We are supposed to heed and trust every word the President says, and he needs to learn that. The judges, and I agree it will probably be overruled, but they are saying to Trump...you made it extremely clear what your intent was....that counts.

Listen, today he continues to embarrass our country (I refer to while standing by Merkel, he actually told a German reporter that they should go to Fox News about his claim of British involvement in wiretapping because Judge Napoltano said it) with his words and accusations that he gets from websites and people on Fox he likes. He is the President....he can validate anything he wishes at any time.

Point is....if he didn't spend time making false SERIOUS claims, imagine we might be talking about health care or the budget. You cannot as President simply make things up....you must act like a grown up and govern. Campaign has been over.

His words are what is screwing up any conversations to get anything done.