I'm not at all involved in fighting terrorism. I am interested in fighting terror. It's a sad state to find someone, but all the more common as we go.
Also, the security meetings he doesn't attend? You're not helping your case here that Trump is even trying to fight terror. He's using it as a cover to keep his Muslim Ban promise. And it worked just fine for his flock.
Lol and you think the people slipping in through Turkey, or Jordan, or... Are getting their passports stamped?
No wonder this travel ban makes sense to you.
Yup the few he's missed. Google tells me he skips some attends others. IMHO that doesnt limit the intel he gets. Im sure he gets it from other places as well.(1)
Dont get me wrong. Im not a Trump apologizer.(2) As Ive said before, Im all for raging on for something valid but most of this is simply nonfactual.
Disagree with (2) as evidenced by (1).
Hey, I can't help that you own words don't paint the picture you want, including the posts you are citing here.Go re-read post 169 and 173. Support not found.
Hey, I can't help that you own words don't paint the picture you want, including the posts you are citing here.
You still sound like you're trying to convince people that the emperor has clothes on.
Yes. Read it for yourself https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/158/text
The original question was where did Trump get the 7 countries from? The answer, is Obama restricted from these 7 countries due to terrorism concerns.
Yes. Read it for yourself https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/158/text
The original question was where did Trump get the 7 countries from? The answer, is Obama restricted from these 7 countries due to terrorism concerns.
I know you cannot help me draw incorrect conclusions. I'm just slightly clever enough to draw the correct ones.And I cant help you draw incorrect conclusions from my words. We can agree to disagree. Thats fine for me
Obama did not ban anyone, only required an extra interview for citizens from Iraq coming to the US
While this did increase waiting times for incoming refugees, but also did not affect green card holders and was in direct retaliation to the discovery of Iraqi refugees being possibly involved in a bomb threat on US troops in Iraq.
Finally, Obamas action was in the form of a bill, backed and desired by congress. Trump issued an EO
Contrary to the repeated claims of people like you, the Obama administration did not “ban visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.” For one thing, refugees don’t travel on visas. More importantly, while the flow of Iraqi refugees slowed significantly during the Obama administration’s review, refugees continued to be admitted to the United States during that time, and there was not a single month in which no Iraqis arrived here. In other words, while there were delays in processing, there was no outright ban.
The whole thing makes no sense, with the fuckover of green card holders the worst of it.
The random selection of countries involved tells us it's pure pandering for domestic political purposes.
I mean, sheesh. That's beyond obvious.
If by random you mean the countries targeted by the Obama administration for the reason of "the growing threat from foreign terrorist fighters.", then yeah.
Do you have any idea how stupid it sounds when you or someone else regurgitates this horse shit?
So are you denying Obama signed the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 (expanded to all seven countries "of concern" in February 2016)??? Really?
So are you denying Obama signed the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 (expanded to all seven countries "of concern" in February 2016)??? Really?
Trump doesn't... so it only seems fair...
So, what are we questioning when the statement is made "so-called judge?"
What exactly? Certainly not the fact that he's a judge. He's a damned judge, appointed by Bush, confirmed by a Repub. Senate 99-0. He wasn't a damned shoe salesman before being nominated by Bush, so what's being questioned by the "so-called" comment?
When I hear a judge being called a "so-called judge", I hear someone questioning the judge's legitimacy. What else can it be?
And that's exactly why the comment can very well be viewed as slander, because the judge is a damned judge, completely legitimate, even has a law degree (imagine that). It's sort of a provable fact.
Ed: I see Spicer trying to further the de-legitimizing of this judge today when he said the judge went "rogue."
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...omewhat-sad-to-see-a-judge-go-rogue-like-this
If by random you mean the countries targeted by the Obama administration for the reason of "the growing threat from foreign terrorist fighters.", then yeah.
No, actually, it's not.
Sent from my LG-H918 using Tapatalk
If he does, he violates the law and likely gets impeached... and Americans reclaim their democracy.
I still think Trump is just trying to do as much damage as possible after he was elected and running with it to deregulate the stock market.
He's out for the little guy ya know
If he gets impeached we still get stuck with Pence.
Watching the current POTUS bitch about reality TV ratings and Tweeting all the time like a little teenaged girl, while being clueless about world affairs is pretty shameful in my book.
The sad thing is, I'd still rather have Pence. He's a hateful bigot determined to set back freedoms for women and LGBT people by 50 years, but we're already getting some of that with Trump... Pence would at least have a basic level of competence as a politician, and would be less likely to have a Rasputin figure calling the shots behind the scenes (much as Bannon does with Trump).
That and Pence's administration would be permanently tainted if Trump was impeached, so hey, it'd help ensure that democracy returns to the US in 2020 when the Republicans lose.
Yes it was "random" in the sense that the countries themselves don't matter to dumbshits who just wanted their muslim ban. It wasn't random in that for such a ban to have much hope of legality it tries to ride onto some existing order, which is what you're arguing in lieu of the former.
Actually Obama's administration did so in a thoughtful and strategic manner.
And one more thing else to add, at no point did Obama BAN travel outright and completely with those 7 countries. And then insert some small inclusion for "minority" religions ie Christians.
That is what Trump did, not Obama.
This talking point about blaming Obama for the travel ban has GOT to end, it is stupid.
OK, I guess you haven't read the whole thread (I don't blame you). I have NEVER, and no one else has AFAIK, said or compared what Obama did to what Trump did, EXCEPT for how Trump got the 7 countries he picked. THATS IT. So what has to end is people like you thinking I am making parallels between the two, or blaming Obama for Trump's actions. Please read post 184 in its entirety where this has already been answered. Thanks.
So you are claiming Obama enacted a travel ban against these 7 countries in 2015 or 2016??? Really?
Yes. Read it for yourself https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/158/text
The original question was where did Trump get the 7 countries from? The answer, is Obama restricted from these 7 countries due to terrorism concerns.
The problem is, you were asked point blank -
And you responded -
Ok?The problem is, you were asked point blank -
And you responded -
As of stated previously in this thread, I didn't think Obama's bill or trumps EO has to do with national security. It's all for show.Indeed. I think that Trump's defenders actually believe the ban has something to do with national security when it's all about pandering to their own well cultivated & irrational insecurities about Muslims in general.
It's purely for domestic political purposes. It's Donald battling the boogeyman to keep us safe. It's kinda like reefer madness...