jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (90 posts)

The 9th circuit court just ruled against Trump and the American people

  1. jackclee lm profile image74
    jackclee lmposted 2 months ago

    This ruling is an over reach by our courts to co opt the powers of the Executive branch.
    When did our courts and judges stop reading our Constitution?
    They are suppose to rule based on the Constitution, instead they have rewritten the Constitution for political expediency.
    My prediction is:
    If a terrorist action can be traced to one of the peope entering our country in the near future from one of these 7 countries, there will be blood on the hands of these judges.
    That is the plain truth...

    1. Paul Wingert profile image78
      Paul Wingertposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      Are you a lawyer? Didn't think so.

      1. jackclee lm profile image74
        jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        I read the Constitution.

        1. Paul Wingert profile image78
          Paul Wingertposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          So?

          1. jackclee lm profile image74
            jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            I wish more people would read it too. It is not hard to understand. It is not full of legal terms.
            It was meant for common people to read and understand.
            I am willing to bet the schools don't even teach it anymore.
            That is why I think many people in power, including some judges don't understand what is in it.
            Why they took an oath to support and defend a document they hardly understand?
            Have you read it?
            Do you know what is in it?
            Don't tell me so what...
            The answer it, it means everything to me.

    2. promisem profile image93
      promisemposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      Please explain how the ruling by the three judges -- two of whom are conservative Republicans -- is a violation of the Constitution.

      1. jackclee lm profile image74
        jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        I'll be glad to. The Constitution gives the President sweeping powers when it comes to borders and immigration control. It is his responsibility to protect the homeland and keep us safe. When he issues an executive order restricting,  temporary migration, of non citizens from 7 countries with security risks, it is within those powers. Remember, he has access to daily intelligence briefings thst we and the judges don't have. Who knows what are the new risks in play...?
        These judges, in the name of political correctness and politics, are willing to risk our lives to give foreign immigrants preference over our citizen's safety.
        As I said, if any terror incident happens, there will be blood on their hands.

        What Trump did is no different than what past presidents did along the same line...Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Carter...

        These activist judges on the 9th circuit will be over ruled by the Supreme Court, IMHO.
        The Constitution will rule at the end of the day. Please go read it, it is only 8000+ words.

        1. promisem profile image93
          promisemposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          Judges and legal scholars disagree with your interpretation.

          I have read the Constitution. I own a copy.

          1. jackclee lm profile image74
            jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            So I guess it is above our pay grade. Let the Supreme court decide...

            1. Jean Bakula profile image94
              Jean Bakulaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              Jackclee,
              I think from what I've been hearing a lot of the trouble is in the way he worded the Presidential Order. If he would just have ripped this one up, and got advice on the best way to rewrite it, it would probably have gone through. At least that's what I was hearing last night, before today's decision was made.

              He asked Rudy Guiliani how to write up a "back door" way to keep Muslims out of the country. It's not helping that Rudy is going around saying that on every interview show. It's going to prove that the POTUS discriminated a religious group, a definite no/no.

              I read a good book a few years ago, Drift, by Rachel Maddow. I know everyone thinks she's uber progressive, being on MSNBC, but they are trying to be a little less far left than they used to be. She makes a good case that the last 4 or so Presidents have abused their powers, and aren't getting Congressional approvals or working with the Legislative or Executive bodies.

              The Intelligence Agency is disgusted with Trump, he won't listen to them and they are saying he doesn't have the attention span to listen to what they are trying to tell them in the briefings.

              People liked the idea he was a Washington outsider, but he made the swamp deeper. Now he has all millionaires and billionaires who don't know what they are doing in his cabinet. When Elizabeth Warren read a speech last night on the floor of Congress from Martin Luther King's Widow, Coretta Scott King, she got rebuked and asked to leave the room. Sessions was a racist years ago, he wanted segregation years after LBJ ruled for Civil Rights, and she was trying to prove Sessions never changed.

              This administration doesn't want to make America great, America is great. These are all people who have their own agendas. Today Kellyanne Conway was in front of a Presidential Seal telling people to buy Ivanka's line of clothing at Nordstroms. How many times does the Trump family have to be told they aren't allowed to make money from the Presidency? He still has not divested from his business interests, which is illegal. He thinks a President can do whatever he or she wants, and they can't. He has to follow the rules.That's why we've had a crisis everyday he's been in office. I doubt he makes it 4 years without getting impeached.

              1. jackclee lm profile image74
                jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                I hear you. So suddenly, after 8 years of President Obama, shreading the Constitution, now people care about it. How convenient. I am a conservative and I am consistant. I go by what is the law and leave politics out of my decision.
                I hope people come to their senses regarding Trump.
                Do what you must but be forewarned. He is a winner and he will win for America.
                Anyone going against him will lose. IMHO.

                1. colorfulone profile image88
                  colorfuloneposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                  I agree, Trump will win!

                  1. Castlepaloma profile image19
                    Castlepalomaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                    Trump should know you can't win them all. Even in his pass 3500 lawsuits.

                    Where the blood on the judges hands come from . Not from these 7 countries on American soil. Only.blood I clearly see is muslims blood from being invaded by American in their home lands.

                  2. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
                    Kathleen Cochranposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                    "This is a humiliating defeat for the White House, revealing just how amateurish the president and his advisers are. The frightful part is that if they cannot handle a simple executive order, what makes anyone think they can handle far more difficult challenges?"  The Washington Post

        2. Don W profile image82
          Don Wposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          The amount of ignorance on display in this comment is staggering. I suggest you educate yourself on the roles of the three branches of government, and the separation of powers before you post such nonsense. If you can't understand those concepts, I suggest you ask someone (who has lots of patience) to carefully explain them to you.

          The system you are undermining with your unabashed ignorance, is the very system that protects you from a tyrannical government. I guarantee, when (not if) a future Democratic president issues an executive order you don't like, you'll be the first calling on the courts to protect you from the scary, overreaching, liberal president, thus adding hypocrisy to your list of accomplishments.

          I also remind you that Trump has pledged an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States". By undermining the judicial branch for doing its job, Trump is attacking the Constitution rather than defending it, and so are you.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image19
            Castlepalomaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            Good point, I was starting to feel trapped in Alice in Wonderland.

            Don't forget to challenge your king, I accept a few off with your heads rather than millions by guns and bombs.. About 1.6 billion Muslims won't go away.

            1. Jean Bakula profile image94
              Jean Bakulaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              You aren't trapped in Alice in Wonderland, you are trapped in George Orwell's 1984. "Doublespeak" is alternative fact, etc. It took me two weeks to order it from Amazon, I couldn't find my old copy from HS (I never throw out books). I guess a lot of other people were thinking like me. Oops, better get ready for Fahrenheit 451.

              These people who follow Trump really believe all his double talk, and accept it as truth. The updated version of 1984 has a long psychological essay about how the characters in the book began to believe the lies, and another essay about the language they spoke. Will start to read it tonight, I don't recall all of it! Can't wait.

              1. Castlepaloma profile image19
                Castlepalomaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                Yes, 1984, written with amazing visions and foresight. Many of them happening in the 21 century. Sometimes the adult cartoons Simpson and South Park impress me.

                1. Jean Bakula profile image94
                  Jean Bakulaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                  Love both of those shows! Not sure if South Park is on anymore, the The Simpsons still are.

                  1. Castlepaloma profile image19
                    Castlepalomaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                    One of my artist visited these south parks guys before they got on the air. He asked is this all legal? Ever since each year afterwards. they 
                    Had battled to stay on the air or not.
                    They sure hit my funny bone with wit.

                    First started out as an 3D animator, today my daughter is s professional animator.

          2. jackclee lm profile image74
            jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            Really, who is ignorant of the Constitution? The separation of power has no bearing in this particular issue. It is the power of the executive to determine immigration and border control and national security. You have allow your own bias to creep in. There are plenty of liberal judges who will interpret the Constitution to suit their agenda. That does not make them right. They are overruled time and again and in the case of the 9th circuit, most liberal court, 80% of the time over turned by the Supreme court.
            You need to brush up on your civics 101...

            1. ahorseback profile image49
              ahorsebackposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              Its all pretty simple really , Trump will write ANOTHER  executive order with the proper legality !

              Watch the liberal heads explode !
              http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13401451.jpg

            2. Don W profile image82
              Don Wposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              Read these words carefully, so that you may understand them:

              No - president - has - unlimited - power.

              That applies to everything, including immigration and national security.

              Do you understand that? I can't make it any simpler.

              1. Castlepaloma profile image19
                Castlepalomaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                President are nearly legal according to paper chase.

                They are beyond God with a licence to steal and kill. I say get rid of both hierarchy systems on the top level only.

              2. jackclee lm profile image74
                jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                No one claimed unlimited power on everything... just on certain parts. It is odd you had no problem when Obama issued order after order (unconstitutional, not by my words by by the Courts and by his own words), and now it is Trump, everything is bad...Can't you just see your own bias at work here. Be honest, don't wave the Constitution when it suits you...

                1. Credence2 profile image85
                  Credence2posted 2 months ago in reply to this

                  Obama took the same risks with the possibility of the courts overturning his EOs. So now that Trump gets his a$$ in the wringer, we can all assume that he is above the law and can not be held accountable by the courts?

                  Indeed.......

                2. Don W profile image82
                  Don Wposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                  You seem to be having trouble comprehending the word everything. Everything means EVERY thing (that's why I used it). It doesn't mean the president has unlimited power for "certain parts". Let me spell it out further:

                  No - branch - of - government - has - unlimited - power - over - anything.

                  They are all limited by each other, the Constitution, and ultimately the people.

                  Do you understand that?

                  It's important you do, because it's a key concept for this system of government.

                  The separation of powers comes into it because even though they overlap, the three branches of government are:

                  SEPARATE. This means, a president cannot decide how a judge rules a case, judges cannot decide what laws Congress create, Congress cannot decide what orders a president gives, and so on.

                  but

                  EQUAL. This means a judge can rule an order given by the president is unconstitutional, the president can nominate federal and supreme court judges, Congress can reject the president's choices for judges, the president can veto a law proposed by Congress, Congress can vote against a law supported by the President, judges can rule a law created by Congress is unconstitutional and so on.

                  Even orders given in a time of war can (and have been) judged on whether they are constitutional by the judiciary. Even martial law is subject to limitation.

                  Do you understand why the founding fathers designed the system of government this way? Again, this is a key concept.



                  __________________________________________________________

                  In terms of Obama, the same can be said in reverse. It is odd you had a problem if Obama issued an order that was unconstitutional, but now it is Trump, everything is fine...Can't you just see your own bias at work here. Can't you just see your own bias at work here. Be honest, don't ignore the Constitution when it suits you...

                  But here's the difference as far as I see it. When the judiciary ruled against Obama, regardless of whether he liked it or not, he didn't question the professionalism of the judges, or act as if the judges have no right to question him, or cry on Twitter like a giant man-baby. That's a big difference.

                  I don't know what the outcome of this case will be, but I know that the judiciary, as a SEPARATE and EQUAL branch of government, is well within its rights to judge whether the orders of a sitting president are constitutional, [b]in any area they feel it is warranted[/i]. If you don't believe that, then you know nothing of this system of government, and you need to go read more.

                  1. jackclee lm profile image74
                    jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                    Don"t lecture me about the Constitution. I know it better than most and I am Constitutionalist first and foremost. I write about it on HubPages for quite a while.
                    If Trump over steps his powers, I will be the first to object and call him out. Unlike some on the left, I am consistent. I did the same under Obama and will continue to do so for any President past and future. The selective nature of some on the left including you is that you seem to have a double standard. When a democrat is in office all is well but a Republican will get the extra scrutiny...
                    Thr bias is on the left and not with me. The press and Academia and hollywood in collusion have taken the country off course for quite a while. It is time for Americans to stand up for our values and not a globalist view.

                  2. jackclee lm profile image74
                    jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                    Don, just give you one example where the power of the president is absolute. The power of pardon. A president can issue a pardon for anyone including murderers if he choose to and there is nothing a Court can do about it.

    3. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      The ninth circuit is the most reversed court in the country - given that it is not surprising that a liberal agenda is more important that the security of the nation.  Don't see that the Constitution plays a part as all they have done is say that the government is not a clear winner there.

      1. promisem profile image93
        promisemposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        It may be the most reversed court in the country, but two out of the three judges are Republicans.

        I would be curious to see over what period of time the reversals took place and whether both Republicans were on the bench for that entire period.

        1. colorfulone profile image88
          colorfuloneposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          Ever heard of RINOs?

          1. promisem profile image93
            promisemposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            Of course. A RINO is any Republican who is not an extremist obsessed with an outdated ideology. I'm one of them.

            In today's environment, Ronald Reagan, whom I voted for, would be called a RINO.

        2. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          Not really up on it, but I get the distinct impression that the GOP hates that court and has for a long time.

    4. lions44 profile image94
      lions44posted 2 months ago in reply to this

      I urge everyone to just read the opinion in full and you'll see why they made that decision. If you want to skim it, start on page 12 and read through 15.  Page 13 talks about the "unreliability" of the act.

      1. colorfulone profile image88
        colorfuloneposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        Congress passed the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952. Trump is solid on the law to ban terrorists.  Carter and Obama used it. 

        The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (Pub.L. 82–414, 66 Stat. 163, enacted June 27, 1952)

        ADDED: 

        (f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
        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.
        https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-20 … ec1182.htm

        1. Jean Bakula profile image94
          Jean Bakulaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          Colorfulone,
          But what you wrote doesn't say he can throw out people based on religious belief, or people with green cards, or passports. There were two cases of CHILDREN, one a brother and sister aged 4 and 5, and another about 4, sitting in a closed room in custody at the airport without their parents. They had to be traumatized. If that was my child, I would sue everybody's a$$e$ off.

          I want the country to be safe too. I don't see why Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and the UAE aren't on that list.The 9/11 attackers all came from there. When Obama made the list of countries Trump is using, he said if people left the US to go to Europe and came back through any of the listed countries, there would be extra scrutiny and they may not be allowed back in the US.

          Our latest terrorists have been home grown.

          Again, Trump CAN win this. He just won't follow the rules. All he had to do in the first place is listen to how to write the Presidential Order correctly. He has to appeal now. But if it goes to the Supreme Ct. we only have 8 justices, thanks to illegal actions on the empty seat from the R's, so it could be deadlocked and the lower court ruling would stand. And, as you all say, it's a liberal court.

          How did Obama shred the Constitution? I know he didn't get authorization for drones. But he was a Constitutional Law Professor at Harvard, so I'm sure he was more familiar with law than we are.Bush W. didn't get approvals for things he did either, although he also had bad intelligence information. Trump's ego will ruin his presidency. If he went to the briefings and listened to all the resources available to him, there wouldn't be a crisis everyday. He picked a Cabinet who doesn't know what they are doing either. He spent today criticizing Nordstrom's for not selling Ivanka's clothing line (illegal to make $ on Presidency) and someone must have told him to stop saying nasty things about judges. It's all his own fault. He's a disaster.

          And I have 3 teachers in the family, and can't understand how Betsy Devose got to be in charge of public schools. She never attended a public school. She was never a teacher, principal or superintendent of a school. She only went to private schools. She just donated a few million bucks to the right people. The Swamp is thicker than it ever was.

      2. GA Anderson profile image85
        GA Andersonposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        Hello Lions44, your suggestion that folks read the Court's opinion - before forming their own opinion of the Court's opinion, was good advice. At least in my opinion.

        I'm sure it was a typo, but the section you noted, (page 13), was about the 'unreviewability', (or could that typo have been a spellchecker mis-click?), of the President's actions involving the issuance of the Executive Order.

        From the judge's perspective, (via the Opinion), and most of the 'Constitutional scholars' and law scholars that are supporters of Trump's EO, this was the government's strongest defense of the EO. Based on this aspect alone, I think the Court got it right.

        I do agree that the president does have valid Constitutional and legal power to issue such an immigration order, just as his supporters claim, but I disagree that the application of that power, (the order itself), is not reviewable. It must be, or we lose a vital check in our system.

        I think the government has strong validation for the President's authority to issue such an order, so the construction of the EO must have been a real mess.

        GA

        1. promisem profile image93
          promisemposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          GA, your point is well made. I heard several attorneys last night say that Trump should simply write a better order. But they also agree that his ego would prevent him from doing so.

    5. ahorseback profile image49
      ahorsebackposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      80 % percent of the ninth courts decisions are overturned eventually !  Ultimately it will  change with appeals .

    6. Misfit Chick profile image93
      Misfit Chickposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      LoL! I'll take a ruling by judges who are actually knowledgable about constitutional law over T-fans reading the Constitution as a hobby any day. You've put all your faith in someone who has about as much experience in that office as you do.

      The fact is, IF there is any kind of 'attack' on our shores after this incident - it will probably be by someone who is already here that Trump has p*ssed off. Neither Trump nor his supporters are capable of admitting when someone else might be right.

      Oh yeah, terrorists can try to come through Canada as thru Mexico or any other way - and they almost did. Both sides might enjoy this article from 1999, pre-911 while Clinton was still in office. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/199 … .year.html

      It talks about Bin Lauden, how they caught the guy who was headed toward blowing up the Space Needle - and a lot of other stuff. And yeah, it begins by talking about how unprepared we were at the time. There's always room for improvement. Trump's EO wasn't an improvement, it was an amateurish & dangerous provocation.

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13406751.jpg

      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13406741.jpg

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13406744.jpg

      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13406748.jpg

    7. Misfit Chick profile image93
      Misfit Chickposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      This is the thing... Sure, we should be doing everything we can to protect ourselves, and maybe we even take things to the extremes when it becomes necessary. But, the moment we allow ourselves to forget who we are - a very colorful & idealistically diverse group of people (one of our STRENGTHS); and when we start compromising our core values because of fear - they win, whoever 'they' is at the time.

      The truth is, the world is a scary place - its damn scary! You could step out into a crosswalk and get hit by a truck. BAM! You're dead! A tornado can blow your entire house away; or a tsunami could come and claim an entire coastline.

      You could be mowing your lawn and cross over into your neighbor's yard just a bit & p*ss him off - do that on one of his bad days, and he might do some inexplicitly crazy thing.

      Car accidents, plane crashes - not taking good enough care of yourself when you get the flu.

      Those are all things that could kill you.

      Precautions were taken long before Trump came into office. He should be reviewing & analyzing those things and THEN implementing whatever EO he thinks he still needs to based off of that information. He acts like he doesn't even talk to the people in the offices he is affecting before he does them - not just on immigration.

      He barged into office acting like a dictator instead of the leader of the FREE world. He seriously needs to adjust his attitude towards us; and so do his supporters who somehow view him as incapable of doing any wrong. Hell, very few of even Obama & Bush's supporters would say that they give them a 100% satisfaction rating.

      Find some balance in the attempt to see the broader perspective. Working WITH instead of AGAINST each other is the only way Trump & Co will ever make a considerable difference in this country or this world.

      Until that happens, we just have to hold out for four years until we can undo the damage he did. It is so damn expensive to keep going from one extreme to the other like that every four to eight years. Finding the middle ground and accomplishing things we can all be proud of - and continue to expound & perfect those things - isn't an impossiblity - or at least, it shouldn't be.
      http://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13406807.jpg


      http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13406810.jpg

    8. jackclee lm profile image74
      jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      Dear all hubbers, Thanks for weighing in on this important topic. I do think we have beaten this topic to death. I value opinion on all side even the ones I disagree. We are all learning here and I hope we are all in agreement that our country is the best in the world and we want to keep it that way.
      I will unfollow the forum from now on. My parting advice to all is to read your Constitution and learn it. It is for all citizens. Only 8000 words of English.

      1. Misfit Chick profile image93
        Misfit Chickposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        Good idea. I would imagine that the 'leaked' stuff coming out about Flynn & Trump's aides being in contact with Russians before he was elected isn't weighing in on this very well. How do you explain that away? Oh yeah, just claim it as fake news and insist that everyone who is concerned about it needs to get a grasp of the english language.

        T-fans are apparently incorrigible. I guess we'll just keep fighting for four years. That is as good of a way to spend four years as any, I suppose. Frankly, if this turns out to be the irrefutable case - he should be impeached based on just on that one thing.

        1. jackclee lm profile image74
          jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          You are free to do as you please...
          Just remember, you said nothing about Obama's actions in his 8 years -
          http://www.breitbart.com/big-government … residency/
          These scandals happened under his watch and no one thought of impeaching him...
          I guess that is the double standards these days.
          You can do your best to oppose Trump. It is the American way.
          I look forward to you joining the Liberal TEA party.
          Perhaps you will win back political power in 4 years or 8.
          It is the democratic process at work.

  2. psycheskinner profile image81
    psycheskinnerposted 2 months ago

    The courts interpret the law.  The president should accept what they determine.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      If it were that simple there would be no appeals possible.

    2. Onusonus profile image85
      Onusonusposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      Except when your president is a Democrat.

      1. psycheskinner profile image81
        psycheskinnerposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        Nope, regardless.  I'm an independent, anyway.

        1. Onusonus profile image85
          Onusonusposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          Sure but you're a leftist, and so Obama went unscathed by you when he was circumventing the separation of powers by pushing out a bunch of executive orders that you agreed with.

          1. PhoenixV profile image79
            PhoenixVposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            The sudden love affair with Courts and Judges will quickly evaporate when the wind blows in another direction.  Give it a minute.

            1. Castlepaloma profile image19
              Castlepalomaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              A symptom of a Megolomanic is to create as many fires as they can in disorder to baffle and confuse the majority. Your busy putting out one fire and do not have enough time to investigate because your onto a bigger fire. Like a hand to ball- shell game.

  3. terra gazelle profile image60
    terra gazelleposted 2 months ago

    The Judiciary is  a co equal to the Executive branch. And they are to make sure that all laws are according to the Constitution..no one is above the law. Including Trump....maybe he should have read the constitution before running.
    NO president is king..

    Trump decided to  create chaos...we will see what good it does.

    1. Castlepaloma profile image19
      Castlepalomaposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      It is not what Christians believe, like the apocalypse, that really matters. It's what Steve Bannon/Trump on what is going to happens. They think it is going to happen, they will make the Apocalypse happen. Or something must happen to them.

  4. Oztinato profile image82
    Oztinatoposted 2 months ago

    Attacks on the courts and free Press are a serious symptom of a facist mentality.

    1. jackclee lm profile image74
      jackclee lmposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      But who is doing the attacking? You could say the press have been attacking Trump even before his election. It seems to me, it cuts both ways. He is defending himself by attacking them back.

 
working