jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (19 posts)

Trumps Travel Ban Passes Supreme Court Test ?

  1. ahorseback profile image81
    ahorsebackposted 5 months ago

    The most perfect  example of ideological pollution of the lower federal courts  by Obama and his corrupted  administration has been  exposed ,  Yesterday  the US Supreme Courts CLEARED  Trumps Travel Ban of seven middle east countries ,   Interesting that the media is ignoring but ONE MORE  of their obstructionist  political moves against the Trump Administration ?

    Liberals lose again !

    1. Credence2 profile image81
      Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

      Half the story, Ahorseback? They gave Trump a reprieve on many points of his ban, but not all of them. The rest will have to be adjudicated by the Supreme Court when it can get it on the docket.

      1. ahorseback profile image81
        ahorsebackposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        One more Trump victory  , in spite of all your alt -leftist obstruction incited by phony  media collusion  ! What's this like the fifteenth one now ?

        Maybe sore Hilary  losers should not   swallow so much  false accusatory media  ?
        Still watching all that  Rachel Maddox soap opera ?

        1. Credence2 profile image81
          Credence2posted 5 months agoin reply to this

          like the 100th time the GOP has tried to repeal Obamacare. So how does the field look now? Looks like Tutor Turtle is in for a grave disappointment. I wonder how many breakables are in Trumps office subject to his upcoming tantrum as a result?

    2. wilderness profile image98
      wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      Hmm.  Guess he's not a racist, bigoted Islamophobe then.  Or maybe the entire SCOTUS is (it was a unanimous vote)?

      Thomas went on record, though, as saying that the decision to let in those with "significant" ties to people here will give rise to an enormous court backlog as the term was not defined.  Want to guess how many US citizens have suddenly been communicating and friendly with individual refugees for years?

      1. ahorseback profile image81
        ahorsebackposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        All of them ?   With all of the phony news obstructionism  from the media , the left , the leftist polluted lower courts  ,  and DOJ ,  Its a wonder Trump hasn't quit . Ha ! .......  Or at least start firing more Obama leftover employees .  Why he doesn't do more of that , I don't know .

    3. ptosis profile image83
      ptosisposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/3b/a8/d8/3ba8d8e3da3f4d2d34c1d6af8fe3524e.jpg?noindex=1

      1. Live to Learn profile image80
        Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        LOL. One wonders if the far left can actually do that. Even being poop it would smell better than what they are throwing out at the moment.

      2. ahorseback profile image81
        ahorsebackposted 5 months agoin reply to this

        One MORE totally embarrassing setback for  liberals and your media , both in  decline .   Advice ?  Better stick with your tofu and granola .  Then you won't have to not only  admit total loss , but you won't have to spell it out either .
        However ,sound this out ?  ..........................   See U in 2024 ?

        1. ptosis profile image83
          ptosisposted 5 months agoin reply to this

          I have no idea what planet you are on.


          The ban can be enforced for refugees and those who do not have that personal relationship.

          Note, this wasn’t a ruling on the constitutionality of the administration’s policy on the merits. Rather, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the White House’s appeal.

          Shouldn’t this quickly become a moot point? Trump’s first executive order on the subject, issued in January, unraveled soon after. The second White House policy, unveiled in March, called for a 120-day ban on refugees and a 90-day ban on other visitors from the targeted countries. The point, Trump administration officials said, was to impose a temporary ban that would allow the relevant U.S. agencies to create new vetting and screening procedures.

          Which of course the DJT Admin has done nothing, nada, about  so I don't know what you are crowing  about since the Muslim ban  ended June 19, 2017 (???? - not sure on the exact date - but expired by October)

          Another victory for Captain clueless

          1. AshtonFirefly profile image81
            AshtonFireflyposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            +1

          2. wilderness profile image98
            wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

            You're right - all of the improperly made decisions by the courts to date have been nothing but a partisan and political delaying tactic, not an honest effort by people, lawyers or the courts to decide legality.  And it worked; by spending millions and tying up the courts in frivolous cases the original order has about run it's course. 

            But what Muslim ban are YOU talking about?  I'm unaware of any ban on travel, immigration or refugees based on any religion, let alone Islam?  Can you be more specific, perhaps pointing to a specific order that prohibits travel for anyone of the Islamic faith?

            1. ptosis profile image83
              ptosisposted 5 months agoin reply to this

              Why are you pretending not to know why the lower courts stopped the Muslim ban based on Trump's own words?  That dog won't hunt.  BTW courts are not partisan when they disagree with you personal politics.

              1. wilderness profile image98
                wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                I repeat, what Muslim ban?  There never was such a thing, regardless of how much you would spin and twist a travel ban from specific geographical areas rampant with terrorism.

                (Did you ever actually read those orders, or simply swallow the spin of the haters?)

                Partisan courts - apparently they are, when they disagree with the SCOTUS, and all in the same liberal direction.

                1. AshtonFirefly profile image81
                  AshtonFireflyposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  It doesn't specifically say "Muslim" ban, but it's not as if politicians have never proposed something under the guise of it being something else. Debating whether or not that's actually his intention is another can of worms.

                2. ptosis profile image83
                  ptosisposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                  In His Words: Donald Trump on the Muslim Ban

                  Here he is in his own words.

                  December 7, 2015
                  Just a few hours before a rally in Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina, Donald Trump released a policy proposal online which called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on.” The 2015 policy proposed a blanket ban on Muslims based on what Trump called “hatred” of the West innate in Islam.


                  June 27, 2016
                  Trump said his Muslim ban would apply "in particular [to] the terrorist states." It's still unclear if this extra vetting subsumes his blanket ban or if this is an extra layer of focus within the existing ban.

                  Trump did however open up the ban to include all people, of all religions who come from Trump-designated terror states. When pressed by NBC's Hallie Jackson on whether his ban would apply to other religions other than Islam, for example Christians in Syria, Trump allowed that : "Christians are going to be vetted very, very seriously, if you're a Christian and you try to get in from Syria."

                  Trump then added that he thinks "Christians from Syria have been treated unbelievably badly by this country," further confusing the parameters of his ban.

                  1. wilderness profile image98
                    wildernessposted 5 months agoin reply to this

                    Great!  Now quote the actual order given, and show it even mentions Muslims.  Or is your quote from Trump that "Christians are going to be vetted very, very seriously, if you're a Christian and you try to get in from Syria." to be taken as indicative that it wasn't Muslims, but ALL religions, faiths, races; all people in other words?  That your claim he banned Muslims specifically, or that it was  Muslim ban, just spin to vilify the man?

  2. Will Apse profile image94
    Will Apseposted 5 months ago

    Everyone knows that muslims are evil.  Except of course, for people who actually know muslims. They are probably confused by the fact that muslims seem like all other kinds of people, with families, hopes, quirks and ... you get the picture.

    Time to wipe out those who do not fit the program, I suppose.

    1. Live to Learn profile image80
      Live to Learnposted 5 months agoin reply to this

      If our government believed that and had the support of the people there would be a ban on Muslims entering the country. There would be a ban on all people from predominantly Muslim countries.

      Since there isn't, yours is a knee jerk reaction. More so than Trump attempting to pinpoint problem spots. I don't agree with the travel ban but it isn't as ignorant as your assumptions.

 
working