Ok?
Have you read Obama's bill? It certainly WAS a ban, although not as inclusive as trumps.
Ok?
Have you read Obama's bill? It certainly WAS a ban, although not as inclusive as trumps.
Can you point to the part of Obama's order that you think made it a ban?
False. They slowed a single type of Visa from a single country. Please like to the language in Obama's order that states otherwise.
Ok?
Have you read Obama's bill? It certainly WAS a ban, although not as inclusive as trumps.
<snip>
First, I NEVER said Obama banned anyone. Here's how the posts went down before you jumped in:
<snip>
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...
OK I re-read the 2015 Act and it appears it wasn't a ban per se; however, if people from 38 listed countries had visited one of the 7 countries listed (same countries in Trumps moratorium) they then had to get a visa, where they didn't have to before. I misread. So they didn't slow any visas, but rather required one where one wasn't required before.
The part I *did* get right is the Trump didn't pull the 7 countries out of his ass, but instead used the 7 countries Obama had concern over.
I would agree with this!
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.
What exactly did it "ban"?Ok?
Have you read Obama's bill? It certainly WAS a ban, although not as inclusive as trumps.
What you two have said is true in that Trump learned what Obama did, but hasn't required a necessary understanding of what was then and what is now.
So when Obama picked those 7 countries calling them "countries of concern" he did so randomly?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/827867311054974976
He just doesn't seem to grasp the concept of an independent judiciary, or separation between branches of government. This is Civics 101, I'm not even American and I understand it better than the fucking President. No wonder he admires autocrats like Putin so much.
"No federal judge, has the authority to substitute his judgment for that of the president when it comes to making a decision on what is detrimental to the national security and foreign policy interests of the nation.
The judge’s only role is to review whether the president’s action is authorized by the Constitution and federal law.
and it is"
Nice source. How much of your news would you say.... you get there ?
OK I re-read the 2015 Act and it appears it wasn't a ban per se; however, if people from 38 listed countries had visited one of the 7 countries listed (same countries in Trumps moratorium) they then had to get a visa, where they didn't have to before. I misread. So they didn't slow any visas, but rather required one where one wasn't required before.
The part I *did* get right is the Trump didn't pull the 7 countries out of his ass, but instead used the 7 countries Obama had concern over.
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate immigration. In 1952, Congress passed a law empowering the president to deny entry into the U.S. to “any class of aliens” considered to be “detrimental to the interests of the United States.” In other words, a threat to America and in the interests of national security.
I agree 100%Sounds like a more effective intervention. If I were a terrorist from a terrorist state wanting to enter the US, I would much prefer to avoid the extra scrutiny by going through a neighboring state with a friendlier relationship with the US.
The President Has Authority to Dictate Immigration
Yet does not have the ability to campaign that he promises to ban Muslims then once sworn in, try to enforce said promise.The President Has Authority to Dictate Immigration
The President Has Authority to Dictate Immigration
Unfortunately he is unable to dictate immigration on the basis of religion, which was pretty obviously his intent.
You might add something that I think he doesn't get, which is that the reason for this has to do with the Constitution, and no act of Congress takes precedence over the Constitution.
The checks and balances in the Constitution are all part of the liberal agenda!Not that separation of powers thing again. Everybody should bend to the will of the Great Leader cuz reasons & shit. So sad.
Yet does not have the ability to campaign that he promises to ban Muslims then once sworn in, try to enforce said promise.