Ahab Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 10 minutes ago, edwinchester said: In the last 12 years there has been less than a 100 deaths in the US caused by Islamic Terrorism. During that same period there has been more than 300,000 gun related deaths in the US. More than 3000 times more likely to be killed by a homegrown shooting. The visa controls the US has in place already work well so why not focus on the real avoidable killer of Americans in the US? However, if you live outside of the liberal/leftist/Democratic Party controlled major urban areas the chance of being a victim of a shooting decreases substantially. The rural areas are also where many legal gun owners reside (and where most of the guns in the USA are located), while the most major urban areas severely restrict legal gun ownership (and discourage or completely ban concealed carry by law abiding citizens). In the large cities of the USA only criminals can carry a gun because they do not follow the laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 from the OP: "The Justice Department's appeal criticized Robart's reasoning, saying the ruling violated the separation of powers...." Is that a bad joke? It reinforces the Constitutional mandate of 'separation of powers' ....rather than violates it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maewang99 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 (edited) this guy is supposed to be working with a Congress under his party's control... instead he is a loner wandering the White House issuing Executive Orders.... he's supposed to be using that stuff to wheel and deal with Congress.... not just dictate..... and in March it all hits the fans when the 2015 Boehner Obama agreement expires.... and this time the two little words starting with an 'M' cannot be ignored anymore.... when "terrorism" won't work as misdirection... because it will involve The Markets.. and they are international now..... this time.... is.... gonna be..... different. Edited February 7, 2017 by maewang99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahab Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Back to the original topic though, the law is pretty damn clear, the President can modify immigration as he sees fit. Concur with the comments that the judge is a hack, the 9th circuit has it's rulings routinely overturned by the US Supreme Court (about 75% of the time they reach the supreme court), and is overruled more than any other circuit. This case will be going to the supreme court if the 9th circuit does not overturn (which is unlikely). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigt3365 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, Ahab said: Back to the original topic though, the law is pretty damn clear, the President can modify immigration as he sees fit. Concur with the comments that the judge is a hack, the 9th circuit has it's rulings routinely overturned by the US Supreme Court (about 75% of the time they reach the supreme court), and is overruled more than any other circuit. This case will be going to the supreme court if the 9th circuit does not overturn (which is unlikely). Actually, the president can not do what he wants. It has to abide by the current laws of the US. This one, according to some very smart judges, many actually, say it violates current laws. Seems too much is going against this ban. And for good reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahab Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Just now, craigt3365 said: Actually, the president can not do what he wants. It has to abide by the current laws of the US. This one, according to some very smart judges, many actually, say it violates current laws. Seems too much is going against this ban. And for good reasons. One it is not a ban, it is temporary suspension applicable to seven countries (Identified By President Obama) as being closely tied to terrorism while security procedures are reviewed (makes sense to me). As Andrew McCarthy pointed out at National Review, the order was completely legal. Not only does the Constitution vest plenary executive power in the president -- “the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations” -- but laws governing immigration explicitly recognize that the president has authority to forbid specific foreigners from traveling into the United States for national security reasons. McCarthy cites federal immigration law Section 1182(f): "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate". In other words, Donald Trump did exactly what the law allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigt3365 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 1 minute ago, Ahab said: One it is not a ban, it is temporary suspension applicable to seven countries (Identified By President Obama) as being closely tied to terrorism while security procedures are reviewed (makes sense to me). As Andrew McCarthy pointed out at National Review, the order was completely legal. Not only does the Constitution vest plenary executive power in the president -- “the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations” -- but laws governing immigration explicitly recognize that the president has authority to forbid specific foreigners from traveling into the United States for national security reasons. McCarthy cites federal immigration law Section 1182(f): "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate". In other words, Donald Trump did exactly what the law allowed. There are several (many) judges that don't seem to think what Trump did was legal. Time will tell. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order Quote Like both legislative statutes and regulations promulgated by government agencies, executive orders are subject to judicial review and may be struck down if deemed by the courts to be unsupported by statute or the Constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ahab Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 (edited) 10 minutes ago, craigt3365 said: There are several (many) judges that don't seem to think what Trump did was legal. Time will tell. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order It is true that time will tell, and it is also true that many judges don't seem to think what Trump did was legal. One thing to consider when discussing US Judges is that arguable the 9 smartest judges in the USA are on the supreme court, and on many decisions four out of five judges are wrong (or at least do not see it as the majority does). Or to look at it another way nearly half of the smartest lawyers disagree on many cases. Which is why the left (and right) judge shop to find a judge that will rule in their favor. Edited February 7, 2017 by Ahab grammar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, craigt3365 said: There are several (many) judges that don't seem to think what Trump did was legal. Time will tell. At least one disagrees. The decision by U.S. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton on Friday dealt a setback to rights’ advocates who argued that not allowing into the U.S. people from the seven majority Muslim countries was unconstitutional. Trump had said it wasn’t a religious-based ban but intended to protect Americans from potential terrorist attacks by targeting countries with dangerous jihadist movements. “The public interest in safety and security in this ever-more dangerous world is strong,” Gorton said in a 21-page ruling that also acknowledged the country’s “rich immigrant history.” https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-02-03/boston-judge-declines-to-extend-order-blocking-trump-travel-ban Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selftaopath Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 On 2/6/2017 at 6:10 AM, jerojero said: He thinks he can steam-roll over everyone and everything, including the Law. Donny, you are NOT above the Law. Oh how I agree, and hope Trump/Bannon mimicking his boyfriend Putin doesn't materialize into the U.S. having a dictator. Him and his gang are certainly putting much effort into achieving this primary goal however. BEWARE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selftaopath Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 On 2/6/2017 at 8:48 AM, bkkcanuck8 said: It is Congresses job to write laws -- not the president. Executive orders orders are subject to judicial review and are subject to being struck down if they are not supported by the constitution or statute (statute as in the laws that were written by congress). Is America in dire-straits b/c Trump and his follower Republicans own congress? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grouse Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 This so called president is becoming an embarrassment to all. He should spend less time tweeting and more time reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selftaopath Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 23 hours ago, craigt3365 said: For your education: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order So no, his order IS NOT the law and may not prevail eventually. Thank you craigt3365. Do you think Trump defenders care about rule of law and or facts? I for one don't. Glad you grace us with facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkkcanuck8 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Just now, selftaopath said: Is America in dire-straits b/c Trump and his follower Republicans own congress? [If] America is in dire-straits it is too soon to blame Trump.... And your assumption that Republicans and Trump are of the same party -- you are sadly mistaken. Trump (former Democrat/ convenient Republican) is really a member of his own party -- himself. Trump would not have won -- if the Democrats had not strayed so far as to lose any part of the party that was not part of the "progressive wing". They also would not have lost if Peloci group had not kneecapped a whole generation of Democratic leaders because they were a threat to her powerbase. They also would not have lost if President Obama had not so angered people who were upset with illegal immigration -- and abandoned all enforcement in the hopes of engineering the future of American politics by uncontrolled immigration who would be beholden to them through the Amnesty programs. The Republican establishment is currently lying low in hopes that Trump eventually hangs himself.... I don't consider that following -- I see it as playing politics while getting a few things they want in the meantime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 10 hours ago, lostlink said: The judge is a political hack. When all is said and done the EO WILL be enforced based on current law. 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens. I'm an American and have been watching US politics for over a half century and I don't recall, except for Nixon, any time a president denigrated a judge on a personal, or any other level. Sitting presidents influence people, particularly American youngsters. Thus far, the US president has condoned pussy-grabbing, lying, denigrating judges, racism against ethnic groups and religions, hoping news organizations go out of business, and a lot more ugly characteristics (interrupting and denigrating people who ask him questions). If I was a parent to small children, I would be compelled to spend a half hour each evening telling my kids not to do what the president does. Trump is influencing a generation of Americans, and they're learning horrible character traits from him, if they can't see through his dangerous bs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selftaopath Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 23 hours ago, craigt3365 said: They do. Trump's not use to being told what to do. He's going to have to get use to working within the law, not around it. Hopefully. OMG I really hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selftaopath Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 2 hours ago, edwinchester said: In the last 12 years there has been less than a 100 deaths in the US caused by Islamic Terrorism. During that same period there has been more than 300,000 gun related deaths in the US. More than 3000 times more likely to be killed by a homegrown shooting. The visa controls the US has in place already work well so why not focus on the real avoidable killer of Americans in the US? Answer: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenl Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 3 hours ago, bkkcanuck8 said: [If] America is in dire-straits it is too soon to blame Trump.... And your assumption that Republicans and Trump are of the same party -- you are sadly mistaken. Trump (former Democrat/ convenient Republican) is really a member of his own party -- himself. Trump would not have won -- if the Democrats had not strayed so far as to lose any part of the party that was not part of the "progressive wing". They also would not have lost if Peloci group had not kneecapped a whole generation of Democratic leaders because they were a threat to her powerbase. They also would not have lost if President Obama had not so angered people who were upset with illegal immigration -- and abandoned all enforcement in the hopes of engineering the future of American politics by uncontrolled immigration who would be beholden to them through the Amnesty programs. The Republican establishment is currently lying low in hopes that Trump eventually hangs himself.... I don't consider that following -- I see it as playing politics while getting a few things they want in the meantime. Better look at the GOP for the main reasons Trump got elected. After all he ran on their platform, not the Dems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earlinclaifornia Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 On 06/02/2017 at 6:29 AM, Ulysses G. said: His executive order IS the law and will prevail eventually. No he won't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomerangutang Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Wait until he starts handing out Presidential Awards. He can hand out as many as he wants of the following: Presidential Medal of Freedom with Distinction. Presidential Medal of Freedom. Presidential Citizens Medal. Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor. President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service. I wonder who will be at the front of the line for such awards. Hmmmm..... Ivanka - in a Nieman Marcus handbag Melania - she should also get combat pay Bannon - maybe he'll also be awarded a razor to shave with Kellyanne Conway (or is it Kellyanne Conjob?) Assange and Comey, for helping him gain the WH via dirty politics his billionaire/golfing buddies, and last but not least; bromance buddy Putin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slip Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 1 minute ago, boomerangutang said: Wait until he starts handing out Presidential Awards. He can hand out as many as he wants of the following: Presidential Medal of Freedom with Distinction. Presidential Medal of Freedom. Presidential Citizens Medal. Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor. President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service. I wonder who will be at the front of the line for such awards. Hmmmm..... Ivanka - in a Nieman Marcus handbag Melania - she should also get combat pay Bannon - maybe he'll also be awarded a razor to shave with Kellyanne Conway (or is it Kellyanne Conjob?) Assange and Comey, for helping him gain the WH via dirty politics his billionaire/golfing buddies, and last but not least; bromance buddy Putin. Animal Hero first class would go to whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now