Hawaii judge halts Trump's new travel ban before it can go into effect

[joecoolfrog]

23 minutes ago, Grubster said:

No I still think we should have, it would have ended the whole mess I believe. I also highly supported the use of nukes in Japan rather than sacrificing 100,000 american troops to beat them in a conventional way. Sorry thats my stance and I think there would be a lot less dead today had we done it. Just don't elect me president and you should have no worries as the military machine is the primary reason we have these wars anyway, remaking one nuke just wouldn't get it with them. There will be wars and terrorists till the end of mankind no matter what you and I think.

No problem , you have your opinion and you present it in a polite fashion. I think you are mad but as you say , you are harmless lol. I hope you are well clear of Washington when its scheduled for nuking , maybe Trumpy will invite you down to his shelter in Palm beach 5555

[WaywardWind]

19 hours ago, Ahab said:

Except for the fact that by law this is a specified duty of the executive branch. Using your logic, decisions to use military force by the President and congress could be stopped by the court action in a single state because one of its citizens would be inconvenienced or have difficulty getting a Visa for a family member. That is not how the separation of powers between branches of the US government is supposed to work. This will be overturned on appeal.

Not quite so.

 

It is accurate to say that the executive department, in particular the president, has authority in immigration matters:

 

8 U.S.C. §212(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.

 

However that is not the entire truth. To determine that, you have to examine the entire statute, including the amendments which which were passed in 1965, one of which is as follows:

 

8 U.S.C. §1152

(a) Per country level

(1) Nondiscrimination

(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 1101(a)(27), 1151(b)(2)(A)(i), and 1153 of this title, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence

 

Trump is very fond of quoting section 212(f), but you will never hear him acknowledge the limitations on his power which are set forth in section 1152.

 

You can continue to do the same, but you will be just as wrong as he is.

 

[simple1]

33 minutes ago, WaywardWind said:

Not quite so.

 

It is accurate to say that the executive department, in particular the president, has authority in immigration matters:

 

8 U.S.C. §212(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.

 

 

However that is not the entire truth. To determine that, you have to examine the entire statute, including the amendments which which were passed in 1965, one of which is as follows:

 

8 U.S.C. §1152

(a) Per country level

 

(1) Nondiscrimination

 

(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 1101(a)(27), 1151(b)(2)(A)(i), and 1153 of this title, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence

 

Trump is very fond of quoting section 212(f), but you will never hear him acknowledge the limitations on his power which are set forth in section 1152.

 

You can continue to do the same, but you will be just as wrong as he is.

 

Your points have been raised a number of times, yet repeatedly ignored by Trump supporters on this forum & as you highlight the 'Idocracy' of the Trump Administration.

[jerojero]

POTUS is becoming redundant. May as well hand all the decision making to the lefty judges. Of course unlike the president, they won't bear any of the responsibility when things go wrong.
The lunatics seem to be running the asylum in the US. Dunno why they bothered with the vote. Bit like what GM and the Lords are doing in the UK.

Right on! The President, especially this one, is above the law. You said it!

[Ahab]

10 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

And my point is the buck stops with the guy that ordered the mission - ALWAYS! You don't pass it down the chain when you are Commander in Chief. Leadership and Command 101.

Something we agree on.

[iReason]

Just now, Grubster said:

...there are those who never want to get off the dole and are very happy living at the lower end of living standards...

Is that right?

Doesn't sound right.

 

Or, are you just making stuff up?

[Grubster]

2 hours ago, iReason said:

Is that right?

Doesn't sound right.

 

Or, are you just making stuff up?

Those who lived in the projects [ large free housing complexes ] in Chicago rarely ever moved away even when employment with really good pay was abundant in the 70s. Generation after Generation.  Yes they complain they want more, but rarely go looking to earn some legally. The Government then closed and demolished these failed projects and built subdivisions with free housing out in the suburbs, Now we have armed guards in the elementary schools out there.   Yes they are happy with their government welfare payments, what they use the money for I don't know but surely not raising their children as most are just running around the streets selling or taking drugs. Less than fifty percent know who their father is.

      That is mostly the black element of the happy poverty, but there are many happy white continuos welfare people also. I find most hispanics are much more family oriented and do try to better themselves, but many live two or three families per home, not exactly what the american dream was built on. Many are good people but we sure don't need more.

    Any new immigrants will only decrease the living standards of all those I mentioned and take jobs away from those who want to better themselves.

 

       I don't see an upside for the US to take immigrants at this time, we have taken more legal immigrants in the past than any other country,  not to mention a few million illegals, many already given amnesty. We cannot provide jobs and a good life for those now, how can we possibly provide for more?

      Add the possible terrorist element and I am not interested at all.  I am not religious and despise most religions as money grubbing, war starting vehicles of evil.

[Scott]

The very basic operation in all of the Embassies in issuing a visa is that the person has to overcome the likelihood that they will become a public charge.   That means if there is reason to believe that someone will end up on welfare, they don't get a visa.  

 

The other basic function is to determine that they will not violate the terms of the visa (for tourists that means overstaying).  

 

To immigrate, someone has to have the funds to support you and your right for public services is severely limited until/unless you become a US citizen.  

[tonray]

13 minutes ago, Grubster said:

Those who lived in the projects [ large free housing complexes ] in Chicago rarely ever moved away even when employment with really good pay was abundant in the 70s. Generation after Generation.  Yes they complain they want more, but rarely go looking to earn some legally. The Government then closed and demolished these failed projects and built subdivisions with free housing out in the suburbs, Now we have armed guards in the elementary schools out there.   Yes they are happy with their government welfare payments, what they use the money for I don't know but surely not raising their children as most are just running around the streets selling or taking drugs. Less than fifty percent know who their father is.

      That is mostly the black element of the happy poverty, but there are many happy white continuos welfare people also. I find most hispanics are much more family oriented and do try to better themselves, but many live two or three families per home, not exactly what the american dream was built on. Many are good people but we sure don't need more.

    Any new immigrants will only decrease the living standards of all those I mentioned and take jobs away from those who want to better themselves.

 

       I don't see an upside for the US to take immigrants at this time, we have taken more legal immigrants in the past than any other country,  not to mention a few million illegals, many already given amnesty. We cannot provide jobs and a good life for those now, how can we possibly provide for more?

      Add the possible terrorist element and I am not interested at all.  I am not religious and despise most religions as money grubbing, war starting vehicles of evil.

Without legal immigration our birth rate cannot sustain any growth. If you want to see contraction of our economy and asset deflation, then preventing immigration is a great way to do it. We simply need the immigrants to fund our SS system, and keep our consumption (which makes up 2/3 of our economic activity) going. An aging western society without immigration is why Japan could not drag itself out of recession for more than a decade. They are still perilously close to failing because of their xenophobic views on immigrants.

[Grubster]

10 hours ago, joecoolfrog said:

No problem , you have your opinion and you present it in a polite fashion. I think you are mad but as you say , you are harmless lol. I hope you are well clear of Washington when its scheduled for nuking , maybe Trumpy will invite you down to his shelter in Palm beach 5555

I am well clear, and I think you are correct that Washington or NY will get nuked if the radical element ever gets the chance. However I live here in Thailand which would be a one day project for China to take, and that may be a lot more likely than we think.  Back to the issue, I am here in a country that does not allow immigration, spending my money here, so I do practice what I preach, you on the other hand should not be giving your money to a country that goes against what you believe. Perhaps you could move to Oslo Norway, live the good life and get on the welcoming committee for incoming immigrants there. Good luck with all.

[Grubster]

15 minutes ago, Scott said:

The very basic operation in all of the Embassies in issuing a visa is that the person has to overcome the likelihood that they will become a public charge.   That means if there is reason to believe that someone will end up on welfare, they don't get a visa.  

 

The other basic function is to determine that they will not violate the terms of the visa (for tourists that means overstaying).  

 

To immigrate, someone has to have the funds to support you and your right for public services is severely limited until/unless you become a US citizen.  

Until the baby is born a US citizen.

[Grubster]

13 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

And my point is the buck stops with the guy that ordered the mission - ALWAYS! You don't pass it down the chain when you are Commander in Chief. Leadership and Command 101.

So I take it when someone working under you really screws up a job you fire yourself. Brilliant.

[Grubster]

18 minutes ago, tonray said:

Without legal immigration our birth rate cannot sustain any growth. If you want to see contraction of our economy and asset deflation, then preventing immigration is a great way to do it. We simply need the immigrants to fund our SS system, and keep our consumption (which makes up 2/3 of our economic activity) going. An aging western society without immigration is why Japan could not drag itself out of recession for more than a decade. They are still perilously close to failing because of their xenophobic views on immigrants.

Japan is doing just fine, check the hotels they stay at here verses yours. Just because the Yen is weak means nothing to their home economy, in fact it strengthens it. Yes theirs has slowed with the Chinese boom, but they will be fine. Not only can the older people do most of the non physical work available today but many will be very happy doing it.

   How much do unemployed/underemployed people pay into SS in the US? If increasing population is the answer to a good economy than I guess world population needs to climb to new heights, I sure hope you realize what that means for the planet. Something about having a cake and eating it too.

[Linzz]

6 hours ago, WaywardWind said:

Not quite so.

 

It is accurate to say that the executive department, in particular the president, has authority in immigration matters:

 

8 U.S.C. §212(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.

 

 

However that is not the entire truth. To determine that, you have to examine the entire statute, including the amendments which which were passed in 1965, one of which is as follows:

 

8 U.S.C. §1152

(a) Per country level

 

(1) Nondiscrimination

 

(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 1101(a)(27), 1151(b)(2)(A)(i), and 1153 of this title, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence

 

Trump is very fond of quoting section 212(f), but you will never hear him acknowledge the limitations on his power which are set forth in section 1152.

 

You can continue to do the same, but you will be just as wrong as he is.

 

Thanks for this.

But does 1152 contradict 212 ? I'm not a Constitutional lawyer ( but don't rub it in!). If the President doesn't have  the right "to suspend entry of all or any class of aliens...as he may deem appropriate" because of a later amendment "no person.....be discriminated against....because of ....place of birth or place of residence" then it has to be clear that his executive order is invalid. If the latter cancels the former statute then he is not getting very good advice especially if the former cannot override the latter amendment. How does this work? Any bigger brains than mine  here?

[klikster]

On 3/16/2017 at 8:46 AM, daveAustin said:

Btw, cue Trump to call to cede Hawaii back to the islanders. 

Maybe that's the hidden agenda of those Polynesians? 

[Linzz]

I really hope and pray that nuclear weapons aren't thrown about as a show of strength as has been suggested here. That would make the US the only country in the world to have used nuclear weapons in anger (for the 2nd time). Hard call telling Iran and others that they cannot develop them. 

[klikster]

20 hours ago, Ahab said:

Using your logic any military operation with casualties is a failure? WWII using your logic was a complete failure and we should have let Germany take over Europe and left Asia to the Japanese so we would not take any casualties. People die during war (news flash) hopefully more of the other guys than our own. US Navy Seals are professional warriors, every one of them is a volunteer, and they know the risks of going into combat. 

So ... those SEALs should just shut up and die quietly?

[klikster]

On 3/16/2017 at 11:45 AM, Grubster said:

I think Trump should begin to build some very large housing projects in Hawaii, then send all these immigrants there, problem solved.

Actually, since DT is your POTUS .. sending them to your neighborhood so you and your posse can keep an eye on them is a better option.

[redwinecheese]

Americans themselves are illegal immigrants in the land of native Indian.

Edited March 17, 2017 by redwinecheese

[Andaman Al]

14 hours ago, Grubster said:

I think we should have nuked Afghanistan

And there we have the character of the Grubster personified.

Edited March 17, 2017 by Andaman Al

[redwinecheese]

14 hours ago, Grubster said:

I think we should have nuked Afghanistan

When I see  Kim Jong-u and his boys playing with missiles I think one day they will push the wrong buttons.

Edited March 17, 2017 by redwinecheese

[Grubster]

15 minutes ago, klikster said:

Actually, since DT is your POTUS .. sending them to your neighborhood so you and your posse can keep an eye on them is a better option.

I don't think Thailand will let them immigrate here thank goodness, nice try though.

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, Grubster said:

So I take it when someone working under you really screws up a job you fire yourself. Brilliant.

LOL, not a Military person then!  No you do not fire yourself, you take responsibility as the commander. He authorised the mission, it was HIS decision, he grows a pair of balls and he takes responsibility for HIS actions, he does not pass the buck down the chain. Simple, if he does not have the moral courage to do that, he does not deserve to hold the office he does, nor does he deserve the respect of any US serviceman.

 

If he stood there and said 'we made mistakes, I take responsibility', people would have thought 'ok, mistakes happen, he is taking a strong and moral position, give hime our support'. I would have backed him had he said that, but he took the man child way out.

[Grubster]

10 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

And there we have the character of the Grubstaker personified.

Yes perhaps you do,  funny you say Grubstaker as I ate at a restaurant with that name when back home, when I got home thirty minutes later the restaurant was gone, totally destroyed by a tornado. Maybe somebody or thing just missed me there. Maybe I should change my beliefs, not.

[Grubster]

6 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

LOL, not a Military person then!  No you do not fire yourself, you take responsibility as the commander. He authorised the mission, it was HIS decision, he grows a pair of balls and he takes responsibility for HIS actions, he does not pass the buck down the chain. Simple, if he does not have the moral courage to do that, he does not deserve to hold the office he does, nor does he deserve the respect of any US serviceman.

 

If he stood there and said 'we made mistakes, I take responsibility', people would have thought 'ok, mistakes happen, he is taking a strong and moral position, give hime our support'. I would have backed him had he said that, but he took the man child way out.

It is his responsibility to his troops to have the best leading them and he needs to hold those responsible for mistakes accountable. The buck stops here is a political statement that has worked for many presidents, evidently it is important to you that your president use that statement that basically holds no value. Many have said it, none have meant it. Yes he has to take responsibility and react accordingly to lesson the danger to his troops. The responsible thing to do is eliminate the weak link. I'm sure the family of the fallen hero was very pleased and proud of the phone call they got from President Trump. Yes I was in the military. Those who were not seem to know a lot about the chain of command sometimes, while they have never lived it. Trust me when you screw up your commander is not saying the buck stops with him.

[ilostmypassword]

5 minutes ago, Grubster said:

 I'm sure the family of the fallen hero was very pleased and proud of the phone call they got from President Trump.

Do you ever actually read or watch the news?

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article135064074.html

[dageurreotype]

Well, wouldn't like to inconvenience Barry's new headquarters would they https://kek.gg/i/7QzfyF.png  the judge's decision being clearly in breach of the Logan Act, you know, the one they insist on throwing around about Trump. 

 

Not partisan, just use the critical thinking sadly lacking here.

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, Grubster said:

Yes perhaps you do,  funny you say Grubstaker as I ate at a restaurant with that name when back home, when I got home thirty minutes later the restaurant was gone, totally destroyed by a tornado. Maybe somebody or thing just missed me there. Maybe I should change my beliefs, not.

You can thank auto spell for that one. I corrected it before you finished posting.

Edited March 17, 2017 by Andaman Al

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, Grubster said:

It is his responsibility to his troops to have the best leading them and he needs to hold those responsible for mistakes accountable. The buck stops here is a political statement that has worked for many presidents, evidently it is important to you that your president use that statement that basically holds no value. Many have said it, none have meant it. Yes he has to take responsibility and react accordingly to lesson the danger to his troops. The responsible thing to do is eliminate the weak link. I'm sure the family of the fallen hero was very pleased and proud of the phone call they got from President Trump. Yes I was in the military. Those who were not seem to know a lot about the chain of command sometimes, while they have never lived it. Trust me when you screw up your commander is not saying the buck stops with him.

Well the Father of the fallen hero was not pleased at all concerning anything the President did or said surrounding the matter. Clearly US and British military have a different ethos as when I was a Military Commander I always took responsibility for what occurred with my men, as Blanchard wrote, when your people do something wrong, the first person you have to look at is yourself - did you brief them correctly, did you resource them correctly, did you plan correctly etc etc and if the answer has any doubt then you make improvements and you as the Commander accept responsibility. Everyone in my chain of command both up and down respected any person that stood up and took rightful responsibility. Funny I met a few really good US Military Commanders that I worked with closely and they were of the same military ethos. Your answer and thought processes are a grave disappointment to the great work they did.

[iReason]

Just now, Grubster said:

Those who lived in the projects [ large free housing complexes ] in Chicago rarely ever moved away

even when employment with really good pay was abundant in the 70s.

Generation after Generation.  

Yes they complain they want more, but rarely go looking to earn some legally.

Yes they are happy with their government welfare payments, what they use the money for I don't know but surely not raising their children

as most are just running around the streets selling or taking drugs.

Less than fifty percent know who their father is.

That is mostly the black element of the happy poverty, but there are many happy white continuos welfare people also.

I find most hispanics are much more family oriented and do try to better themselves,

but many live two or three families per home, not exactly what the american dream was built on.

Many are good people but we sure don't need more.

Any new immigrants will only decrease the living standards of all those I mentioned and take jobs away from those who want to better themselves.

 

Yup. Just makin' stuff up.

 

Just a huge  pile of ignorant clichés.

 

Gonna need more substantial data than the stereotypical drivel you've posted here.

 

"what they use the money for I don't know but surely not raising their children"

In other words, you're really not sure what you are talking about.

Just makin' stuff up to suit your racial profiling agenda.

 

And ; "Happy poverty"?? 

 

"I find most hispanics are much more family oriented and do try to better themselves,

but many live two or three families per home, not exactly what the american dream was built on."

 

Since you seem to know, exactly what is the american dream built on?

 

"Any new immigrants will only decrease the living standards of all those I mentioned and take jobs away from those who want to better themselves."

 

Yup, just makin' stuff up and stating it as if it were fact.

 

P.S. Nice touch with the hispanic description: "Many are good people"

Where have I heard that before...

And of course, we sure don't need any more good people. 

According to you.