Since Trump’s intent very plausibly is a ban on Muslims, I think we are all the more obligated to scrutinize the language of the order, it’s application, and effect.
But more than that, the escalation in scope and needless preemption is a substantially new precedent that compares poorly with Obama’s order in 2011 and casts a shadow on American values and leadership in the world.
Trump has business interests in Oman, Indonesia, Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Uzbekistan, Somalia, Niger, Algeria, and the Sudan? Maybe a couple of those, but all of those? You are making shit up.
Trump banned immigration from the countries where ISIS is most active. That’s it. He got the list of nations from the Obama administration.
Seriously, does a person have to be a bold faced liar to be a Democrat? Surely you can defend your party and your positions without making a fool of yourself this way.
Yeah, that’s a great example of somebody close to Trump explaining why and how this isn’t a Muslim ban, thanks for that.
Well go ahead, fucking scruntinize something. There’s no scrutinizing going on here. There’s PK lying and declaring this to be a Muslim ban, and you trying to explain why his lying is acceptable. Scrutiny reveals that it’s not a ban on Muslims.
Yes, when the left doesn’t have reality on their side, they can always fall back on “how it’s viewed across the world”. Which really just means “leftists in other countries agree with leftists in this one, therefore we must be right”.
Yes, a great deal of people are 'troubled" across the world whenever a Republican does anything in this country. The same is true of Democrats, though of course that’s not taken as noteworthy.
Also, when politifact says a Republican statement is Mostly False, that means it’s true. Go on, read the article and not their score. Yes, Obama did the same damn thing as Trump and nobody cared.
K: it is not a conspiracy if it is reporting facts and all I have done is report facts…
every single action of Herr Trumpfs is one leading to a coup…
come back to me in a year and tell me otherwise…
K: feel free to believe your alternative facts… it is a Muslim ban… one he propose during the
campaign… being right wing, I know you have problems with facts like global warming and
science and so being in denial about this doesn’t surprise me…
Notice how you completely ignored every point I made to just repeat your initial assertion as if it hadn’t been challenged? That’s what liars who know they don’t have a leg to stand on do.
Nobody is making you lie but you. You could defend liberal principles and perhaps even the DNC without lying. It doesn’t need to be this way.
It’s merely his word that the decision was based on facts and an admission the original plan was to find a way to legally ban Muslims. It isn’t clear exactly how the original intent has evolved. Why do we need to impose sweeping travel bans now?
I’ve already questioned several aspects of the order. Look at my reply to Magsj and tell me why this was necessary?
So no worries about not really having a clear reason for doing this. No concern about escalating policy and precedents needlessly?
I read it. What onslaught of Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian, Libyan, Somalian, Yemeni, Sudanese refugees-turned-terrorists in the U.S. warrants Trump’s order?
You’re the only one thinking you know everything you need to know from the score.
Right. Trump initially wanted to ban Muslims, the idea wasn’t popular, so he came up with something else, which is not a ban of Muslims. Guilani goes into great detail about how this is not a ban of Muslims.
Well, we probably should have done it years ago, as everybody’s favorite watery-eyed hypocrite seemed to acknowledge:
But our previous President couldn’t afford to piss off the people Trump is pissing off; people like PK were Obama’s base. Trump was voted in by a different group, so he can afford to ignore left wing morons that shriek 'RACISM!" about every little thing. In fact, he won the presidency by mocking them.
The need didn’t change in Jan, 2017; the will to act did.
For the same reason it was necessary when Obama did it in 2011, and for the same reason so many people thought it was necessary when we discussed it again in 2015: there’s no way to vet the people from these countries, and these countries are riddled with ISIS and similar elements.
This isn’t an escalation of anything. This is a cessation of an escalated refugee policy.
Obama based his decision on the arrest of two Iraqi refugees in Kentuky. Is that your ‘onslaught’'? Did I just sleep through all those Iraqi terrorists blowing the shit out of Americans in 2011 that forced Obama’s hand?
Meanwhile, Trump has incidents in Germany, France, and Sweden to think about. All countries who have experienced attacks, and all countries who’s people are backlashing against taking on refugees from these same places. Even Sweden doesn’t fucking want them anymore
As if the Democrats aren’t assassins that murder anyone who tries to sue them in court? As if democrats don’t scheme and rig all other parties to lose the election? Ha. Don’t make laugh. As if Democrats dont pass orwellian draconian laws…
