President Donald Trump: The Thread

[Kyyle23]

At this point, is Trump just rooting for a terrorist attack so he can say "I told you so!!!"??

 

*by a radicalized Muslim

[Kyyle23]

Correct. If it's someone that looks like you and I, we won't hear much.

 

The next time he talks about Quebec will be the first

[StrangeSox]

Increased security for the judges involved, who are receiving threats.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/politics/jud...rder/index.html

[StrangeSox]

It turns out that Trump's Putin-friendly national security advisor Flynn did talk to Russia about sanctions prior to Trump taking office. He had previously denied this.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washington...android-verizon

[Soxbadger]

Increased security for the judges involved, who are receiving threats.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/politics/jud...rder/index.html

 

Those type of people dont get this wont help them win.

 

Lawyers and judges have been killed by clients, killed by defendants, killed by people who dislike their rulings.

 

Saddest part is, those people are afraid of refugees that most likely they would never even interact with. But I guess they have to keep people like me who live in cities safe, because those refugees are the real threat, not the people who threaten judges and lawyers.

 

KEEP AMERICA SAFE AGAIN, SEE YOU IN COURT.

[The Beast]

So...now do the Dems fillibuster to just keep the court at 8 justices? Would the vote go 5-4 in favor of the Travel Ban?

[caulfield12]

They would just invoke the nuclear option to force Gorsuch through.

With two Republican appointees (WA, appellate court 1/3) already blocking Trump, not sure 5-4 can be assumed at all.

 

Maybe 3-6 or 4-5 against Trump?

[Kyyle23]

Chaffetz town hall was insane

 

Flynn and Pence also getting busted for lying. This has turned out to be a crazy day

[caulfield12]

The Democratic Party might not even have to obstruct if Trump keeps up his assault on members of his own party and the courts/judicial system.

 

We're getting to the point where EVERYTHING is going to be tied up in courts...anything to do with immigration and sanctuary cities, repealing the ACA (especially when it comes to proposed cuts to Medicaid/Medicare), conflicts of interest/ethics, election & voter fraud/Russian intervention, etc.

 

The blueprint was already laid by the various conservative organizations that sued to stop Obama "from abusing his authority" on immigration. State AG's are quickly learning that they are better positioned to stop the president than the more symbolic efforts of the US Senate.

 

 

It's yet another reminder of how the party in the majority (1993, 2001, 2009) almost always oversteps and is quickly reminded of the limits of their mandate. If Trump was smart, they'd let it go instead of appealing, or take everything they've learned the last two weeks and submit a new, more narrowly-defined order. Of course, there's risk there, in terms of losing again (assuming it would be blocked again somewhere along the way)...but at least delaying would give them the opportunity to get a SC decision with Gorsuch on the bench in March/April.

 

 

Chaffetz town hall

 

Edited February 10, 2017 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

"His Palm Beach club Mar-a-Lago doubled its initiation fee, while Sean Spicer, his press secretary, has labeled it "the Winter White House." The CEO of his hotels business pondered a threefold expansion. Foreign dignitaries are flocking to his Washington hotel. He urged British officials to scuttle a wind farm that would obstruct the view from his golf course. Lawyers for first lady Melania Trump claimed in a New York State libel suit that a Daily Mail article about her cost her the chance “to launch a broad-based commercial brand in multiple product categories, each of which could have garnered multimillion-dollar business relationships."

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trum...s-family-234874

 

[brett05]

Do you have twitter, Brett? The President has stated numerous times that it's a ban. It's not Democrats making s*** up.

I do, it's not, it's a ban for a short period of time from 7 countries. It is not a ban on Muslims. 90% of the foreign Muslims are under no such EO. Just stop, please folks, I know you don't like anything that helps America. Please just stop.

[Steve9347]

I do, it's not, it's a ban for a short period of time from 7 countries. It is not a ban on Muslims. 90% of the foreign Muslims are under no such EO. Just stop, please folks, I know you don't like anything that helps America. Please just stop.

Thankfully, it's nothing, because it was so poorly conceived, planned, and executed by racist bigots that the other branches of government are rightly doing their job to block it.

 

The people are rising up, and I am proud of them.

 

We have to keep to feet on the gas peddles. We cannot let us. The moment we as a nation let up, they will know they can get away with the bulls***, lies, and genuine evil this administration is trying to pull off.

[Kyyle23]

I do, it's not, it's a ban for a short period of time from 7 countries. It is not a ban on Muslims. 90% of the foreign Muslims are under no such EO. Just stop, please folks, I know you don't like anything that helps America. Please just stop.

 

Oh you have us mistaken. We just don't like lying con artists with ties to Russia that make travel bans specifically tailored around their business interests who refuse to divest and refuse to let the American public know where their money comes from. We love America

 

PS we don't like his white nationalist puppeteer either

[Steve9347]

Oh you have us mistaken. We just don't like lying con artists with ties to Russia that make travel bans specifically tailored around their business interests who refuse to divest and refuse to let the American public know where their money comes from. We love America

 

PS we don't like his white nationalist puppeteer either

Stop wasting your time on trolls who do NOT READ. Move forward, for every 1 brett there are 10 people who voted Trump who will look at #realnews and realize their grave mistake.

[brett05]

Thankfully, it's nothing, because it was so poorly conceived, planned, and executed by racist bigots that the other branches of government are rightly doing their job to block it.

 

The people are rising up, and I am proud of them.

 

We have to keep to feet on the gas peddles. We cannot let us. The moment we as a nation let up, they will know they can get away with the bulls***, lies, and genuine evil this administration is trying to pull off.

It's not racist at all. Typical liberal playbook.

The "people" are allowing an even bigger landslide in 2018.

[brett05]

So...now do the Dems fillibuster to just keep the court at 8 justices? Would the vote go 5-4 in favor of the Travel Ban?

While the SC is political, they are nothing like the 9th Circuit. They are going to side with the Constitution. Even with 8 judges, the vote will side with the President.

[brett05]

Stop wasting your time on trolls who do NOT READ. Move forward, for every 1 brett there are 10 people who voted Trump who will look at #realnews and realize their grave mistake.

The color of the sky in my world is blue, in yours it's what?

[caulfield12]

I do, it's not, it's a ban for a short period of time from 7 countries. It is not a ban on Muslims. 90% of the foreign Muslims are under no such EO. Just stop, please folks, I know you don't like anything that helps America. Please just stop.

 

Here's the problem. If he hadn't spoken to Giuliani and asked for him to help craft a "Muslim ban," if he hadn't tried to protect Christians in those countries from "reverse discrimination," if he hadn't excluded green card holders/permanent residents who had already gone through the EXTENSIVE vetting process, we wouldn't be having this discussion. If children under 18, those needing immediate medical care and all those working/studying in the US weren't part of this, then he would at least have a legitimate argument.

 

As it stands, there was no compelling threat to the security of the country (at least that we know of)... and there NEVER has been a deadly attack inside the US from a citizen of any of those 7 countries, while there were lots of European and Middle Eastern countries more clearly connected to terrorism that were left off the list.

 

If he hadn't chosen to directly attack the judicial branch and basically DARE them to stand in his path, we might not be here. And it's doubtful that two Republican judicial appointees (one in Washington, one part of the 3 judge appellate court) would have blocked the order as unconstitutional.

 

Saying that the opposition "is against anything that helps America" is just another version of "so-called judge," questioning the former Attorney General's patriotism, and then calling any decision that goes against you "political" despite the fact that 2 of the 4 judges who have gotten in the way since last weekend have been Republican appointees. If all four were Democratically-appointed, that would be one thing. Of course, the GOP will still argue the Western District is the most liberal of all and that such a decision isn't a surprise, but Trump will always have an excuse.

 

What will the excuse be if the Supreme Court unanimously goes against him? He'll probably get 3 out of 8 votes, but there's no way they will let him fundamentally disrespect the entire rationale for our checks and balances system. If they jam through Gorsuch using the nuclear option and try to get the case into his hands with the hope the SC will overturn on appeal, then the well will have been poisoned completely in terms of anyone trusting the fairness of our system after Merrick Garland was blocked for nearly a year. If that happens, just for Trump to prove a point that he never loses, it will be a shame for our country and the impact will be lasting.

 

All Trump has to do is improve the ACA, stay out of Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security (as he promised numerous times as a candidate in 2015), and come up with some type of compromise on immigration reform/Dreamers. Heck, 90+% of Americans would agree with sending those convicted of felonies who are illegally in the US back to their home countries and creating severe penalties for (getting caught) returning. It's roughly 800,000 people, but, instead....he has to threaten to evict 8-11,000,000 and throw the country into total chaos and protest when it's not even necessary.

[Kyyle23]

The color of the sky in my world is blue, in yours it's what?

 

today it is an extra lovely shade of blue

[caulfield12]

I do, it's not, it's a ban for a short period of time from 7 countries. It is not a ban on Muslims. 90% of the foreign Muslims are under no such EO. Just stop, please folks, I know you don't like anything that helps America. Please just stop.

 

Here's the problem. If he hadn't spoken to Giuliani and asked for him to help craft a "Muslim ban," if he hadn't tried to protect Christians in those countries from "reverse discrimination," if he hadn't excluded green card holders/permanent residents who had already gone through the EXTENSIVE vetting process, we wouldn't be having this discussion. If children under 18, those needing immediate medical care and all those working/studying in the US weren't part of this, then he would at least have a legitimate argument.

 

As it stands, there was no compelling threat to the security of the country (at least that we know of)... and there NEVER has been a deadly attack inside the US from a citizen of any of those 7 countries, while there were lots of European and Middle Eastern countries more clearly connected to terrorism that were left off the list.

 

If he hadn't chosen to directly attack the judicial branch and basically DARE them to stand in his path, we might not be here. And it's doubtful that two Republican judicial appointees (one in Washington, one part of the 3 judge appellate court) would have blocked the order as unconstitutional.

 

Saying that the opposition "is against anything that helps America" is just another version of "so-called judge," questioning the former Attorney General's patriotism, and then calling any decision that goes against you "political" despite the fact that 2 of the 4 judges who have gotten in the way since last weekend have been Republican appointees. If all four were Democratically-appointed, that would be one thing. Of course, the GOP will still argue the Western District is the most liberal of all and that such a decision isn't a surprise, but Trump will always have an excuse.

 

What will the excuse be if the Supreme Court unanimously goes against him? He'll probably get 3 out of 8 votes, but there's no way they will let him fundamentally disrespect the entire rationale for our checks and balances system. If they jam through Gorsuch using the nuclear option and try to get the case into his hands with the hope the SC will overturn on appeal, then the well will have been poisoned completely in terms of anyone trusting the fairness of our system after Merrick Garland was blocked for nearly a year. If that happens, just for Trump to prove a point that he never loses, it will be a shame for our country and the impact will be lasting.

 

All Trump has to do is improve the ACA, stay out of Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security (as he promised numerous times as a candidate in 2015), and come up with some type of compromise on immigration reform/Dreamers. Heck, 90+% of Americans would agree with sending those convicted of felonies who are illegally in the US back to their home countries and creating severe penalties for (getting caught) returning. It's roughly 800,000 people, but, instead....he has to threaten to evict 8-11,000,000 and throw the country into total chaos and protest when it's not even necessary.

[brett05]

Here's the problem. If he hadn't spoken to Giuliani and asked for him to help craft a "Muslim ban," if he hadn't tried to protect Christians in those countries from "reverse discrimination," if he hadn't excluded green card holders/permanent residents who had already gone through the EXTENSIVE vetting process, we wouldn't be having this discussion. If children under 18, those needing immediate medical care and all those working/studying in the US weren't part of this, then he would at least have a legitimate argument.

 

As it stands, there was no compelling threat to the security of the country (at least that we know of)... and there NEVER has been a deadly attack inside the US from a citizen of any of those 7 countries, while there were lots of European and Middle Eastern countries more clearly connected to terrorism that were left off the list.

 

If he hadn't chosen to directly attack the judicial branch and basically DARE them to stand in his path, we might not be here. And it's doubtful that two Republican judicial appointees (one in Washington, one part of the 3 judge appellate court) would have blocked the order as unconstitutional.

 

Saying that the opposition "is against anything that helps America" is just another version of "so-called judge," questioning the former Attorney General's patriotism, and then calling any decision that goes against you "political" despite the fact that 2 of the 4 judges who have gotten in the way since last weekend have been Republican appointees. If all four were Democratically-appointed, that would be one thing. Of course, the GOP will still argue the Western District is the most liberal of all and that such a decision isn't a surprise, but Trump will always have an excuse.

 

What will the excuse be if the Supreme Court unanimously goes against him? He'll probably get 3 out of 8 votes, but there's no way they will let him fundamentally disrespect the entire rationale for our checks and balances system. If they jam through Gorsuch using the nuclear option and try to get the case into his hands with the hope the SC will overturn on appeal, then the well will have been poisoned completely in terms of anyone trusting the fairness of our system after Merrick Garland was blocked for nearly a year. If that happens, just for Trump to prove a point that he never loses, it will be a shame for our country and the impact will be lasting.

 

All Trump has to do is improve the ACA, stay out of Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security (as he promised numerous times as a candidate in 2015), and come up with some type of compromise on immigration reform/Dreamers. Heck, 90+% of Americans would agree with sending those convicted of felonies who are illegally in the US back to their home countries and creating severe penalties for (getting caught) returning. It's roughly 800,000 people, but, instead....he has to threaten to evict 8-11,000,000 and throw the country into total chaos and protest when it's not even necessary.

1) The Us Protects minority groups with refugees in general

2) You don't bring in minors without their parents

3) The list comes from President Obama

4) It's not unconstitutional, the 9th district did not rule on it's constitutionality

5) The nuclear option won't happen in time nor will it be necessary. As you all were wrong with the election you are all wrong thinking that this will be anything but in favor of the President. I have more faith in the liberals on the Courts than you liberals here.

6) The 11,000,000 are all criminals. Not just 800,000. You tell that it's ok to those families that have lost loved ones thanks to the crime of illegals.

 

So far, greatest President ever. He made promises and he's keeping them at lightning speed including fixing our healthcare not just dismantling it like every single liberal though he'd do.

[Quin]

1) The Us Protects minority groups with refugees in general

2) You don't bring in minors without their parents

3) The list comes from President Obama

4) It's not unconstitutional, the 9th district did not rule on it's constitutionality

5) The nuclear option won't happen in time nor will it be necessary. As you all were wrong with the election you are all wrong thinking that this will be anything but in favor of the President. I have more faith in the liberals on the Courts than you liberals here.

6) The 11,000,000 are all criminals. Not just 800,000. You tell that it's ok to those families that have lost loved ones thanks to the crime of illegals.

 

So far, greatest President ever. He made promises and he's keeping them at lightning speed including fixing our healthcare not just dismantling it like every single liberal though he'd do.

 

Your grasp on history is tenuous at best here.

[CrimsonWeltall]

He made promises and he's keeping them at lightning speed including fixing our healthcare not just dismantling it like every single liberal though he'd do.

 

Ah yes, I remember when Trump fixed our healthcare system.

 

It was shortly after the Bowling Green massacre, but right before the Atlanta attacks.

[StrangeSox]

...didn't he just say yesterday that Republicans might not get around to doing anything with Obamacare until next year?

 

e: "The list comes from Obama!" may be the worst talking point yet from Trumpists

Edited February 10, 2017 by StrangeSox

[caulfield12]

1) The Us Protects minority groups with refugees in general

2) You don't bring in minors without their parents

3) The list comes from President Obama

4) It's not unconstitutional, the 9th district did not rule on it's constitutionality

5) The nuclear option won't happen in time nor will it be necessary. As you all were wrong with the election you are all wrong thinking that this will be anything but in favor of the President. I have more faith in the liberals on the Courts than you liberals here.

6) The 11,000,000 are all criminals. Not just 800,000. You tell that it's ok to those families that have lost loved ones thanks to the crime of illegals.

 

So far, greatest President ever. He made promises and he's keeping them at lightning speed including fixing our healthcare not just dismantling it like every single liberal though he'd do.

 

Nobody in America likes separating families, especially green card/permanent resident families.

 

Obama's list was never intended to be used as a comprehensive travel ban.

 

If the case was allowed to back to District Court for discovery, the odds of winning are currently 1-2%.

 

Trump's ego won't allow Gorsuch being blocked for long...and there's no way (in the current political climate) he peels off 8 Dems to get to 60. At best, he gets Manchin from WV.

 

Go after 8-11 million people at once and you'll be blocked by half the states in the country in the courts. You might have 25% of the country agreeing...and the economic impact would be over $1 trillion. The sheer number of agents to go house to house and forcibly round up that many people would be astronomical.

Edited February 10, 2017 by caulfield12