Money changers in Pattaya

[webfact]

U.S. appeals court will not put Trump travel ban case on hold

By Dan Levine

REUTERS

 

Shanez Tabarsi (L) is greeted by her daughter Negin after traveling to the U.S. from Iran following a federal court's temporary stay of U.S. President Donald Trump's executive order travel ban at Logan Airport in Boston, Massachusetts, U.S. February 6, 2017. REUTERS/Brian Snyder

 

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Monday rejected a U.S. Department of Justice request to place on hold an appeal over President Donald Trump's travel ban on people from seven majority-Muslim countries.

 

The order from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals could increase pressure on the Trump administration to clarify its intentions regarding the controversial executive order.

 

The 9th Circuit suspended Trump's travel ban earlier this month while litigation over the measure proceeds. Trump has said he will soon issue a new executive order that addresses concerns raised by the appeals court judges.

 

The president's Jan. 27 order caused chaos at airports around the world as visa holders heading to the United States were pulled off planes or turned around upon arrival at U.S. airports.

 

Trump has said travel limitations are necessary to protect the United States from attacks by Islamist militants. His original order barred people from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the country for 90 days. Refugees were banned for 120 days, except those from Syria, who were banned indefinitely.

 

Americans were deeply divided over the measure, which was condemned by prominent U.S. companies and allies and challenged in court by the state of Washington.

 

The 9th Circuit had directed the Justice Department to file a legal brief defending the travel ban later this week. Given Trump's intention to issue a new order, however, the Justice Department asked last week for the appeal to be placed on hold.

 

In a response, the state of Washington said the Trump administration has said both that it would pursue an appeal, and that it would issue a new order.

 

"Throughout these proceedings, there appears to have been a lack of communication between the Department of Justice and the White House," the Washington attorney general's office said in a court filing arguing that the 9th Circuit move forward now.

Representatives for the Justice Department declined to comment.

 

After stating that a new travel ban would be issued last week, a White House official said on Wednesday that a new order would come sometime this week.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-02-28

[craigt3365]

Really? LOL

Quote

 

"Throughout these proceedings, there appears to have been a lack of communication between the Department of Justice and the White House," the Washington attorney general's office said in a court filing arguing that the 9th Circuit move forward now.

Representatives for the Justice Department declined to comment.

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

It's clear to anyone that by asking for a hold on the appeal the Trump Administration is displaying its confidence in the soundness of the executive order. Well, it's clear to anyone who lives in Oppositeland.

[Andaman Al]

53 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It's clear to anyone that by asking for a hold on the appeal the Trump Administration is displaying its confidence in the soundness of the executive order. Well, it's clear to anyone who lives in Oppositeland.

or La La Land  

[kennw]

3 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

or La La Land  

And I thought that the order was issued as a matter of urgency to stop the impending threat to US security. Silly me!

[dunroaming]

If this being dealt with as a matter of urgency then it  doesn't reflect well on  the Trump administration.  Next week seems to be the repeated chant. Pathetic doesn't come close.,

[ilostmypassword]

8 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

If this being dealt with as a matter of urgency then it  doesn't reflect well on  the Trump administration.  Next week seems to be the repeated chant. Pathetic doesn't come close.,

And what if they had succeeded in putting a hold on the hearings and a terrorist incident occurred? Would that mean that the Trump administration had the blood of innocent Americans on its hands?

[Jingthing]

trump's political capital is tanking.

[Snig27]

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

trump's political capital is tanking.

 And with it, the credibility of the USA. This really is the Asian century. 

[Jingthing]

 And with it, the credibility of the USA. This really is the Asian century. 

Yes. Another reason the resistance is important. At least international people can see that the majority opposes him and didn't even vote for him. So there's still some hope unlike other nations where autocratic regimes have come to power and have crushed all resistance.

[Thaidream]

Trump and his inner circle constantly use the threat of terrorism to fool the American people into thinking that blocking people from these countries will actually be worthwhile. The fact is that none of the people who immigrate from the 7 countries are a threat because they have already been vetted. The aim of this administration is to fill the populace with fear from terrorists; fear that immigrants are taking American jobs and fear that foreigners are taking advantage of America through bad trade deals.  None of this is true.

What he really doing is trying to reshape how American takes care if its most vulnerable by shifting funds from social programs to such things as defense by asking for a $54 Billion increase in the US defense budget already the largest in the World and spending more billions on such things as border walls and deportations of not criminal aliens but illegal people who are essential to the US workforce.

Trump talks about fake news- but the only real fake is he and his inner circle who are on the path to destroy American values. If the Statue of Liberty could come alive- the lady would be weeping.

[White Christmas13]

8 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

or La La Land  

Hey have you seen the movie ?

[redwinecheese]

6 hours ago, Thaidream said:

fear that foreigners

Brexit started it then pound plunged and some european right wing fans  are following...sometimes I thank Almighty for the petrodollar deal

Edited February 28, 2017 by redwinecheese
clarification

[Srikcir]

The courts have already set a temporary restraining order on the travel ban. So DOJ asking for a hold would seem duplicitous. I suspect the DOJ request for a hold is a legal maneuver to delay the trial and the attendant discovery process, production of documents, phone calls, emails, affidavits, etc. Since the government has yet to prove an emergency situation justifying the ban, the court followed a main tenant to serve justice - expediency.

 

It's also possible that DOJ is not yet ready to issue an amended or a new ban because it still lacks proof that there is an immediate danger of terrorism from the designated seven countries. The government has leaked that the new/amended ban would still be limited to the seven Muslim original countries. But thus far, DHS has been unable to prove imminent terrorist acts from any of the seven. So a hold on the appeal would also buy time for DOJ to continue to develop evidence - essentially trying to fit proof to a preconceived policy.

 

[ilostmypassword]

42 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

The U.S. Ninth Circus Court of Appeals.  Proud record holder of the most reversed of the federal circuit courts.

Hawker9000, proud patron of fake news websites:

"In our research, we found that the 9th Circuit has a higher-than-average reversal rate, but not the highest. Additionally, experts told us that counting reversals doesn’t necessarily say much about the quality or substance of the 9th Circuit’s work. "

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/feb/10/sean-hannity/no-9th-circuit-isnt-most-overturned-court-country-/

[Andaman Al]

5 hours ago, redwinecheese said:

Brexit started it then pound plunged and some european right wing fans  are following...sometimes I thank Almighty for the petrodollar deal

The pound 'plunging' only effects expats who sit in bars waiting for their pensions and do nothing else all month. The pound 'plunging' has led to a massive increase in UK exports and a huge boom for business. Traders in the stock markets are as happy as can be.  Think on that.

[Scott]

8 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

The pound 'plunging' only effects expats who sit in bars waiting for their pensions and do nothing else all month. The pound 'plunging' has led to a massive increase in UK exports and a huge boom for business. Traders in the stock markets are as happy as can be.  Think on that.

I doubt that the pound 'plunging' only affects expats who sit in bars waiting for their pension.   That is a pretty broad statement.    Regardless, it's a bit off-topic, so let's get back to this topic.  

[ResandePohm]

2 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

The pound 'plunging' only effects expats who sit in bars waiting for their pensions and do nothing else all month. The pound 'plunging' has led to a massive increase in UK exports and a huge boom for business. Traders in the stock markets are as happy as can be.  Think on that.

The pound "plunging" effects every Brit living in the UK. All prices on imported products are increasing and will only get worse when when import duty is added. So German cars  will be more expensive as will French wine, Swiss cheese and European holidays. As for a trip to Thailand : just forget it. You live in a strange world Andaman Al.

[Itsnottheplaceitwas]

Trump has said travel limitations are necessary to protect the United States from attacks by Islamist militants. His original order barred people from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the country for 90 days. Refugees were banned for 120 days, except those from Syria, who were banned indefinitely.

 

grow some balls Theresa and catch up 

Donald your tops keep it going ! 

& you whiners just remember he was voted in by you fellow country men & women 

& it's the most interesting thing out of the states in years 

 

just keep the plane fulls away from us we don't want them either we've got far to many thanks 

[hawker9000]

9 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Hawker9000, proud patron of fake news websites:

"In our research, we found that the 9th Circuit has a higher-than-average reversal rate, but not the highest. Additionally, experts told us that counting reversals doesn’t necessarily say much about the quality or substance of the 9th Circuit’s work. "

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/feb/10/sean-hannity/no-9th-circuit-isnt-most-overturned-court-country-/

"proud patron of fake news websites:"

 

Yes, and you should certainly know:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/liberal-ninth-circuit-court-overturned-average-80-time/

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/373273/

 

Hail to the chief.

 

[craigt3365]

16 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

"proud patron of fake news websites:"

 

Yes, and you should certainly know:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/liberal-ninth-circuit-court-overturned-average-80-time/

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/373273/

 

Hail to the chief.

 

That member was correct.  Your statement that they are the most overturned district court is incorrect.  It's the 6th district court.  And your links are showing incorrect information.  Also known as fake news.

 

Perhaps best to find more reliable sources for your information.

[ilostmypassword]

8 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

"proud patron of fake news websites:"

 

Yes, and you should certainly know:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/liberal-ninth-circuit-court-overturned-average-80-time/

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/373273/

 

Hail to the chief.

 

If you actually bothered to read the national review article you woul find that the claim was made on the number of cases reversed. The thing is, the 9th circuit court is huge, and has by far the highest number of cases.  In 2015, just under 12,000 cases were filed with it, 4000 more than any other circuit. 11 cases out of 12,000 were selected for reviews. So by itself it means nothing that it has a higher number of reversals. In terms of percentage, which is slightly more meaningful. it's not the highest.

"A spokesperson for Hannity pointed us to a 2014 article in National Review titled, "Ninth Circuit Leading the Pack for ‘Most Reversed.’ " But the evidence presented in the article does not support the headline. "

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/feb/10/sean-hannity/no-9th-circuit-isnt-most-overturned-court-country-/

As for the gateway-pundit.com, that gives Breitbart.com its chief competiton for being the  motherlode of fake news. Here's a current example of how low they will stoop.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/liberal-thug-attacks-navy-seal-widow-congressional-address/

[jimmybkk]

On 28/02/2017 at 5:47 PM, Jingthing said:

Yes. Another reason the resistance is important. At least international people can see that the majority opposes him and didn't even vote for him. So there's still some hope unlike other nations where autocratic regimes have come to power and have crushed all resistance.

You should write to your congressman and let them know that you're preferred candidate did not win the presidential election and you therefore demand a change to the democratic election system currently in place for presidential elections in the US.

 

You're applying spin and cherry-picking statistics to validate your dislike of Trump. No matter who was president now the statement that "the majority opposes him (or her as the case may be)" would be true if you chose to apply the correct spin to it. You make it sound like this is some kind of anomaly, so you are either attempting to be deliberately misleading or else your knowledge of democratic electoral procedures is woefully inadequate. In the last general election in the UK more people voted for someone other than the eventual winner (David Cameron) than voted for him. That statement is far more relevant than your kinda lame "the majority opposes him and didn't even vote for him" because at least I referenced that it was based on people who had actually voted, but even so... so what? That's the way the system is set up. What exactly is this "majority" you refer to anyway?

 

Trump supporters could be shouting from the rooftops about how more people voted in this presidential election than have voted in any presidential election in US history, while CNN can run the headline: "Voter turnout at 20 year low in 2016..." and both would be correct.

 

I think it's hilarious to watch the way that certain aspects of the US have reacted to the Trump victory. The transparency resulting from the panic caused by an "outsider" doing the unthinkable and actually winning the presidency has been very illuminating. A lot of people are absolutely sh!tting themselves about what he may reveal and are pulling out all the stops to try to shut him down, and they've got the MSM support too, hence the protests and marches being shown on TV news channels which are labelled "anti-Trump" which is a joke. Every 4 years an awful lot of people are disappointed with the result of the presidential election but they don't to take to the streets because the response to their protests would be: "Your guy lost - Get over it!", and there would be zero news coverage. The correct term for the "Anti-Trump" protests and marches should be "Anti-Democracy", but of course that could be labelled unpatriotic and wouldn't go down well and besides, when MSM are on a mission deemed so essential that the concept of unbiased and impartial reporting unashamedly goes out the window, they can label the protests whatever they like.

 

The time for protesting about a presidential candidate is in the run-up to the election in the hope of publicizing your concerns, enlightening others and perhaps influencing the way they vote. Dissatisfaction/disappointment with the result of a presidential election is a natural by-product of living in a country with a democratic electoral system. Unless you have evidence of irregularities with the whole voting/vote-counting process whingeing and moaning about the winner is just childish and you are allowing yourself to be herded by mainstream media into protesting against the person instead of protesting against the system that allowed the person to get to where he is today, which is where your anger should be directed.

[Jingthing]

It matters whether a new president has a mandate or not. Losing the popular vote proves that. Heard of fake news? trump is trying to assert a fake mandate. trump and the party he leads by way of a hostile takeover does indeed now have almost all the power. But still trump lacks a strong mandate especially for his more extreme policy agendas.

To add, dude. Don't dictate to me what I should write. You're characterization of my position about the electoral college is false. While it's worth looking at its not a matter of one election. trump tragically legally won the election with some help from Putin and I have never said differently.

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, jimmybkk said:

You should write to your congressman and let them know that you're preferred candidate did not win the presidential election and you therefore demand a change to the democratic election system currently in place for presidential elections in the US.

 

You're applying spin and cherry-picking statistics to validate your dislike of Trump. No matter who was president now the statement that "the majority opposes him (or her as the case may be)" would be true if you chose to apply the correct spin to it. You make it sound like this is some kind of anomaly, so you are either attempting to be deliberately misleading or else your knowledge of democratic electoral procedures is woefully inadequate. In the last general election in the UK more people voted for someone other than the eventual winner (David Cameron) than voted for him. That statement is far more relevant than your kinda lame "the majority opposes him and didn't even vote for him" because at least I referenced that it was based on people who had actually voted, but even so... so what? That's the way the system is set up. What exactly is this "majority" you refer to anyway?

 

Trump supporters could be shouting from the rooftops about how more people voted in this presidential election than have voted in any presidential election in US history, while CNN can run the headline: "Voter turnout at 20 year low in 2016..." and both would be correct.

 

I think it's hilarious to watch the way that certain aspects of the US have reacted to the Trump victory. The transparency resulting from the panic caused by an "outsider" doing the unthinkable and actually winning the presidency has been very illuminating. A lot of people are absolutely sh!tting themselves about what he may reveal and are pulling out all the stops to try to shut him down, and they've got the MSM support too, hence the protests and marches being shown on TV news channels which are labelled "anti-Trump" which is a joke. Every 4 years an awful lot of people are disappointed with the result of the presidential election but they don't to take to the streets because the response to their protests would be: "Your guy lost - Get over it!", and there would be zero news coverage. The correct term for the "Anti-Trump" protests and marches should be "Anti-Democracy", but of course that could be labelled unpatriotic and wouldn't go down well and besides, when MSM are on a mission deemed so essential that the concept of unbiased and impartial reporting unashamedly goes out the window, they can label the protests whatever they like.

 

The time for protesting about a presidential candidate is in the run-up to the election in the hope of publicizing your concerns, enlightening others and perhaps influencing the way they vote. Dissatisfaction/disappointment with the result of a presidential election is a natural by-product of living in a country with a democratic electoral system. Unless you have evidence of irregularities with the whole voting/vote-counting process whingeing and moaning about the winner is just childish and you are allowing yourself to be herded by mainstream media into protesting against the person instead of protesting against the system that allowed the person to get to where he is today, which is where your anger should be directed.

You're confusing protesting against Trump's policies with protesting the results of the election. Yes. Trump won the electoral. He's now the President. That doesn't entitle him to immunity from criticism or opposition.

And what is this nonsense about?

"A lot of people are absolutely sh!tting themselves about what he may reveal and are pulling out all the stops to try to shut him down"

Remember this is the guy who claimed he had some shocking evidence about Barack Obama's birth certificate.  We're still waiting for that piece of evidence to emerge. And if you need to be reminded how massively and unprecedentedly dishonest he is, there's this:

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/