So much winning, you'll be tired of winning
So much winning, you'll be tired of winning
DiscoGary wrote:
Trump has every right to keep people out from those countries. It's as clear as day. He should just ignore them. This is a separation of powers issue. We are governed by our elected officials. We can not allow ourselves to be ruled by a few judges out west.
there you have it - trumpers advocating tyranny - there's your enemy, folks. Saying Trump shouldn't be bound by the law.
take a close look at those words - you'll see more. Good Americans will know that these people are the enemy and will take away your republic if you let them.
The restriction wasn't struck down. The Appeals Court for the 9th Circuit has allowed the TRO to remain in effect until the District Court in Seattle can rule on the merits (legality) of the travel restriction. The Administration will appeal to the Supreme Court to get the TRO lifted but they need 5 justices to agree with them in order for this to happen. The legality of the matter is far from settled. Even when the District Court rules, the losing side will appeal and it will likely end up back at the Supreme Court for round 2.
requiem for democracy wrote:
DiscoGary wrote:This is a separation of powers issue. We are governed by our elected officials.
It's a lot worse than that. This is a judicial coup d'etat.
Really? We're a nation of laws, not politicians. Why don't you know this?
If Trump/Bannon brain trust worked better than an 8 year-old child, they'd know better. It doesn't.. So they don't.
Clown. Show.
The Law wrote:
The restriction wasn't struck down. The Appeals Court for the 9th Circuit has allowed the TRO to remain in effect until the District Court in Seattle can rule on the merits (legality) of the travel restriction. The Administration will appeal to the Supreme Court to get the TRO lifted but they need 5 justices to agree with them in order for this to happen. The legality of the matter is far from settled. Even when the District Court rules, the losing side will appeal and it will likely end up back at the Supreme Court for round 2.
Nope. Their isn't 9 judges. A simple 4-4 and the districts decision will stand. As fat as appealing, of course the cons willl try that. They'll continue to try to make America Trump's again.
pop_pop!_v.2.2.1 wrote:
Really? We're a nation of laws, not politicians. Why don't you know this?
This is a nation composed of three branches of the Government - Legislative, Judicial, and Executive. Each of these branches have separate, well defined, and Constitutionally protected rights and responsibilities.
The ruling by the 9th District totally ignores this separation and unequivocally usurps the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to the Executive branch.
This precipitous action constitutes an unlawful coup, an all-out attack, perpetrated by the overreaching Judicial branch on the viability of our Government, on the very fabric of our nation.
Although this is not the final ruling in this case, the trajectory of the shoddy judicial proceeding so far bode ominously for the future of true democracy in this country.
Iidi wrote:
Pookie Jones wrote:The RepubliKKKan even voted against him. This issue is done! A 4-4 vote in the Supreme Court would uphold the lower court ruling.
Do you also spell Democrat as DemoKKKrat?
Trump's father is the one who was arrested for participating in a KKK riot in Queens. Do try to keep up.
DiscoGary wrote:
Trump has every right to keep people out from those countries. It's as clear as day. He should just ignore them. This is a separation of powers issue. We are governed by our elected officials. We can not allow ourselves to be ruled by a few judges out west.
You could not be more brainwashed. I've seen you rant about the Constitution and law and order and enforcing the laws on the books so many times I can't even count. This court decision is the very definition of the Constitution, law and order, and balance of powers in action. It is wonderful that a president cannot do whatever he wants, absolutely wonderful. You should be cheering it.
Let me put the logic the Muslim and refugee ban in language that you might understand. Banning people from these countries that go through our very thorough immigration processes, where most immigrants are peaceful and want safety for their families and communities, like pretty much everyone else on the face of the earth, is the equivalent of banning people from violent parts of the United States, like Chicago, and preventing them from traveling to the safer parts of the country, like the north suburbs of the Chicago. That is essentially what the ban is doing.
Yet you are so brainwashed that you believe the elected officials that you support should break the Constitution and other laws just so they can get what they want. Not sure why I'm wasting my time here, because that switch will not ever click in your mind.
DiscoGary wrote:
Trump has every right to keep people out from those countries. It's as clear as day. He should just ignore them. This is a separation of powers issue. We are governed by our elected officials. We can not allow ourselves to be ruled by a few judges out west.
WE MUST DEFENDUR OF THE KONSTITUSHION!!!
The Law wrote:
The restriction wasn't struck down. The Appeals Court for the 9th Circuit has allowed the TRO to remain in effect until the District Court in Seattle can rule on the merits (legality) of the travel restriction. The Administration will appeal to the Supreme Court to get the TRO lifted but they need 5 justices to agree with them in order for this to happen. The legality of the matter is far from settled. Even when the District Court rules, the losing side will appeal and it will likely end up back at the Supreme Court for round 2.
The EO is a dead duck. Nothing will save it. Trump will lose and whine like a little girl. Expect Trump to release an EO that allows him to overrule the Supreme Court as he sees fit.
DiscoGary wrote:
Trump has every right to keep people out from those countries. It's as clear as day. He should just ignore them. This is a separation of powers issue. We are governed by our elected officials. We can not allow ourselves to be ruled by a few judges out west.
0/10 No one will believe this one.
(Yeah why should the president listen to the courts)
DemoKKKrat here wrote:
Papa Fred wrote:Trump's father is the one who was arrested for participating in a KKK riot in Queens. Do try to keep up.
We DemoKKKrats founded the KKK. We DemoKKKrats fought to keep slavery. Those damn Republicans founded in 1854 to abolish slavery. Damn them!
The Republicans were the good guys in 1854. What the hell happened to them?
The Trump presidency is unraveling. Kellyane Conway has lost total respect and credibility.
Some of the Republican leaders are starting to speak the truth.
The media is outright calling Trump on his lies.
The everyday American does not believe a word Trump says.
DiscoGary wrote:
Trump has every right to keep people out from those countries. It's as clear as day. He should just ignore them. This is a separation of powers issue. We are governed by our elected officials. We can not allow ourselves to be ruled by a few judges out west.
Why do you hate the Constitution?
vivalarepublica wrote:
Let me put the logic the Muslim and refugee ban in language that you might understand. Banning people from these countries that go through our very thorough immigration processes, where most immigrants are peaceful and want safety for their families and communities, like pretty much everyone else on the face of the earth, is the equivalent of banning people from violent parts of the United States, like Chicago, and preventing them from traveling to the safer parts of the country, like the north suburbs of the Chicago. That is essentially what the ban is doing.
No, it is not the same.
The fundamental difference is that people from the "violent parts of United States" are still US citizens protected by the Constitution. Visitors and immigrants not present on the US soil have no US Constitutional rights. None.
Papa Fred wrote:
Iidi wrote:Do you also spell Democrat as DemoKKKrat?
Trump's father is the one who was arrested for participating in a KKK riot in Queens. Do try to keep up.
We DemoKKKrats founded the KKK. We DemoKKKrats fought to keep slavery. Those damn Republicans founded in 1854 to abolish slavery. Damn them!
DemoKKKrat here wrote:
Papa Fred wrote:Trump's father is the one who was arrested for participating in a KKK riot in Queens. Do try to keep up.
We DemoKKKrats founded the KKK. We DemoKKKrats fought to keep slavery. Those damn Republicans founded in 1854 to abolish slavery. Damn them!
True. But of course in those days the Democrats were rural, southern, conservative, and "small gov't" while the Republicans were urban, northern, progressive, and wanted Federal rule. But the parties witched platforms (as evidenced by Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats) during the Civil Rights era.
http://www.livescience.com/34241-democratic-republican-parties-switch-platforms.htmlDemoKKKrat here wrote:
Papa Fred wrote:Trump's father is the one who was arrested for participating in a KKK riot in Queens. Do try to keep up.
We DemoKKKrats founded the KKK. We DemoKKKrats fought to keep slavery. Those damn Republicans founded in 1854 to abolish slavery. Damn them!
We can thank people like Papa Fred Trump for taking over control of the KKK and branding it to fit their form of bigotry.
Iidi wrote:
Why are some people so happy about this? Do they not understand that these countries have higher levels of risk to harm us and our culture? It seems like people are putting their dislike of Trump above actually thinking about the issues and solutions. Any politician that has done this is no longer looking out for the country but instead their personal and political agendas. This is not what being a representative is about. They need to be removed.
I was against the ban from the beginning, and I am pleased to see this resistance. I am absolutely aware that, in the immediate future, the ban could increase our security. I am aware of the small chance it might even save lives (including the lives of those whom I love). Nevertheless, I would rather promote freedom than take advantage of increased safety in this instance. Suffice it to say that I believe the vast majority of those who would be affected by the ban are undeserving of the proposed treatment, and I therefore oppose said treatment. There exists a line I would cross to ensure safety over freedom, but this threat falls well short of that line.
Trump is bad. This news is good