Posted:
#26
No matter what side of the issue you are on ..who in this forum can say this is not a victory for President trump ?
Who ?
Who ?
Supreme Court revises travel ban
Posted:
#28
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:
No matter what side of the issue you are on ..who in this forum can say this is not a victory for President trump ?
Who ?
No matter what side of the issue you are on ..who in this forum can say this is not a victory for President trump ?
Who ?
In post #11, CD posted a link of a site written by some obviously well informed legal eagles.
In paragraph 15 of that link, the writer suggests that the courts decision was a "huge victory for the plaintiffs"
*Noted, the site is clearly anti-Trump
bigreds daddy
Posted:
#29
Look the left can't win the hearts and minds of the American people with Same-Sex Marriage,Transgender bathrooms Stripping guns, Going after Christianity etc. They need the courts. So when Trump puts 5 conservatives on the S.Court and hundreds at the lower level the left will have nothing left except to burn and destroy sh%T while dressed like an ISIS fighter
Posted:
#31
More partisan garbage..
It seems to MANY here that the issue isnt what is best for the country rather if their political party WINS a point or WINS some court case or forces their agenda down the throats of the other side.
What a pathetic disgusting mess...how people can seriously feel this way is baffling, it is absurd and quite dangerous...
Posted:
#32
What is right with bringing in people from countries whom we can't vet? What's wrong with saying we're not letting you in. Coming to America and being an American is a privilege not a right. Had the last President done this you wouldn't hear a peep from the media. It would've been being "Progressive"
People from these countries are only coming to bring Islam and Sharia Law to America. If you're coming to America you will abide my OUR laws
Personally if someone from a country where Islam is the #1 religion comes to America and becomes a citizen they should renounce that religion. America is a Judeo-Christian nation
Posted:
#33
Quote Originally Posted by Hugh_Jorgan:
In post #11, CD posted a link of a site written by some obviously well informed legal eagles.
In paragraph 15 of that link, the writer suggests that the courts decision was a "huge victory for the plaintiffs"
*Noted, the site is clearly anti-Trump
yes, one of the contributors thinks it's a victory for the plaintiffs because of the limited nature of the ruling. the overall writer wasn't so sure. ultimately, she says both sides have some things they can celebrate.
what is interesting and they do a good job of explaining is the ban is a 90 day ban. by october, the 90 days will be over. what will the government's position be then and what will the supreme court be deciding.? hard to say.
so, i would say you can't really tell who wins here because the 90 day ban will run its course by october and we don' really know what the government's next move is and then of course we don't know what exactly the supreme court will be looking at in october.
that being said, to go from no ban to allowing a partial ban to be permitted for the time being has to be some sort of victory for the government.
Posted:
#35
According to the guardian, surpreme court's travel ban ruling may not be a win for Trump. Court's endorsement is a temporary compromise that partially allows a narrow part of the ban.
Injunctions imposed by lower courts are still in place. Majority of travellers from affected countries would still be permitted to enter the US. That is, individuals with direct connections to Americans such as relatives or business.
Since a total ban couldn't be implemented, this may be a signal that Trump might ultimately lose.
Injunctions imposed by lower courts are still in place. Majority of travellers from affected countries would still be permitted to enter the US. That is, individuals with direct connections to Americans such as relatives or business.
Since a total ban couldn't be implemented, this may be a signal that Trump might ultimately lose.
Posted:
#36
Quote Originally Posted by sundance:
That is great material wall. Nothing but classy guys representing the Right inside the forum. 9-0 by any definition 'could' be considered or more importantly should be considered a Landslide. Not entirely sure about the smile with all of the teeth. There is no gloating whatsoever from me on the SCOTUS vote. Just a statement of fact. Thankfully the retiring Kennedy was not a swing vote. Let's be honest.. The Left has not won anything since Trump took office. Noting but losers since Jan of 2017. All of the aforementioned comments are the Truth.
Obviously some members here "can't handle the TRUTH." 
And Wall, what's IMPORTANT is that out great longstanding CONSTITUTION is strictly adhered to...
What an outstanding pick Gorsuch will turn out to be for our great founding document..can't wait for similar others nominated..Jurors who don't rewrite the law..ie (the 9th Circus) that court's days are numbered..
Posted:
#37
If,some people in this forum cannot see this ruling as a victory for President Trump ..than they should see it as a victory for national security...
The SCOTUS ruled based on the the Constitution not on liberal politics like the 9th Circuit Court.
As far as cheering for one side on this issue ..lets not forget that back in February Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton taunting President Trump by tweeted :
"3-0"
...After a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled unanimously against the president’s temporary restriction on immigration from certain high-risk countries..
Thank God,, she didn't win. I hate to think of the awful consequences had she won... with her open borders policies...plus naming a Supreme Court Justice..
The SCOTUS ruled based on the the Constitution not on liberal politics like the 9th Circuit Court.
As far as cheering for one side on this issue ..lets not forget that back in February Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton taunting President Trump by tweeted :
"3-0"
...After a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled unanimously against the president’s temporary restriction on immigration from certain high-risk countries..
Thank God,, she didn't win. I hate to think of the awful consequences had she won... with her open borders policies...plus naming a Supreme Court Justice..
Posted:
#39
The Judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
seems if a lower court continues to make mistakes in their ruling Possible Sessions could advocate for their removal in a higher court .
Posted:
#40
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:
If,some people in this forum cannot see this ruling as a victory for President Trump ..than they should see it as a victory for national security...
The SCOTUS ruled based on the the Constitution not on liberal politics like the 9th Circuit Court.
As far as cheering for one side on this issue ..lets not forget that back in February Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton taunting President Trump by tweeted :
"3-0"
...After a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled unanimously against the president’s temporary restriction on immigration from certain high-risk countries..
Thank God,, she didn't win. I hate to think of the awful consequences had she won... with her open borders policies...plus naming a Supreme Court Justice..
If,some people in this forum cannot see this ruling as a victory for President Trump ..than they should see it as a victory for national security...
The SCOTUS ruled based on the the Constitution not on liberal politics like the 9th Circuit Court.
As far as cheering for one side on this issue ..lets not forget that back in February Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton taunting President Trump by tweeted :
"3-0"
...After a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled unanimously against the president’s temporary restriction on immigration from certain high-risk countries..
Thank God,, she didn't win. I hate to think of the awful consequences had she won... with her open borders policies...plus naming a Supreme Court Justice..
I guess even a partial win is cause to celebrate for someone who can't seem to even unite his own party.
Posted:
#42
Quote Originally Posted by packers1992:
What is right with bringing in people from countries whom we can't vet? What's wrong with saying we're not letting you in. Coming to America and being an American is a privilege not a right. Had the last President done this you wouldn't hear a peep from the media. It would've been being "Progressive"
People from these countries are only coming to bring Islam and Sharia Law to America. If you're coming to America you will abide my OUR laws
Personally if someone from a country where Islam is the #1 religion comes to America and becomes a citizen they should renounce that religion. America is a Judeo-Christian nation
Nailed it.
Posted:
#44
Yeah, sure, I’m going to listen to a site that has a link to the Versus Trump podcast where they discuss how the Trump Administration is breaking the law. What a load of bull. Takecareblog.com is a bunch of opinionated liberal fake law psycho babble.
Fox News posts actual law.
1952 federal law - the Immigration and Nationality Act - "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, may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary," Section 212 (f) of the law states, "suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
The actual law was on Fox News and wasn’t anywhere in that fake law article.
If Trump had broken the law, the Supreme Court wouldn’t have ruled in HIS favor. Case closed.
What’s wrong with the country is fake news, fake laws, fake judges, fake lawyers, and fake rulings. I’m celebrating the law. I’m celebrating constitutional law. I’m celebrating real law. I’m celebrating real judges. I’m celebrating a ruling based on actual law.
What’s best for the country is to defeat the democratic criminal terrorist organization known as the Democratic Party.
Fake liberal judges making rulings on fake law pisses me off. Everyone should be pissed off about what liberals are doing. It's absolutely sickening.
The liberals lost. Period! Celebrating that people with credible ties to American citizens have the right to come to the US isn’t a moral victory at all. The point of the ban was to stop people the US has no idea who they are or who they know from coming here. Liberals are idiots.
This victory was a victory for America. That's something worth celebrating.
Fox News posts actual law.
1952 federal law - the Immigration and Nationality Act - "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, may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary," Section 212 (f) of the law states, "suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
The actual law was on Fox News and wasn’t anywhere in that fake law article.
If Trump had broken the law, the Supreme Court wouldn’t have ruled in HIS favor. Case closed.
What’s wrong with the country is fake news, fake laws, fake judges, fake lawyers, and fake rulings. I’m celebrating the law. I’m celebrating constitutional law. I’m celebrating real law. I’m celebrating real judges. I’m celebrating a ruling based on actual law.
What’s best for the country is to defeat the democratic criminal terrorist organization known as the Democratic Party.
Fake liberal judges making rulings on fake law pisses me off. Everyone should be pissed off about what liberals are doing. It's absolutely sickening.
The liberals lost. Period! Celebrating that people with credible ties to American citizens have the right to come to the US isn’t a moral victory at all. The point of the ban was to stop people the US has no idea who they are or who they know from coming here. Liberals are idiots.
This victory was a victory for America. That's something worth celebrating.
Posted:
#45
You know what, can we change the quote on the Statue Of Liberty to:
"Go ahead and keep your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
We've got enough of that sh!t here already....."
Also, change the book in her hand to a gun, and the torch to a middle finger.....
Posted:
#47
This is what one might term a vanilla win for both sides.
In actuality, I think very few people are opposed to all of the restrictions that were enacted by Trump and I think even many of Trump supporters oppose some of the reach of his ban.
For example, the Supreme Court decision allows those with a connection to the US to remain, A connection includes employment and being in school.
So while Trump was looking to deport students and those legally employed, the Supreme Court did not allow it to go that far.
From the perspective of making us safer, when one is working or a student, they are certainly less likely to present as a danger to the US, at least statistically.
So no major victory here. More like the Supreme Court finding the political middle that our politicians seem to lack these days.
Posted:
#49
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
This is what one might term a vanilla win for both sides.
This is what one might term a vanilla win for both sides.
In actuality, I think very few people are opposed to all of the restrictions that were enacted by Trump and I think even many of Trump supporters oppose some of the reach of his ban.
For example, the Supreme Court decision allows those with a connection to the US to remain, A connection includes employment and being in school.
So while Trump was looking to deport students and those legally employed, the Supreme Court did not allow it to go that far.
From the perspective of making us safer, when one is working or a student, they are certainly less likely to present as a danger to the US, at least statistically.
So no major victory here. More like the Supreme Court finding the political middle that our politicians seem to lack these days.
i would extend this to those work with our central intelligence or military in those areas they are vetted as to be ci in syria or afghanistan or other areas the intelligence department has vetted them. they and their aimmediate family should be allowed to be here if that was the bargain to make cooperation there. we should not dispose of these assets when not needed.
Posted:
#50
Quote Originally Posted by DoubleUp4Life:
NAHHHHH I am neither left or right
However I have ZERO RESPECT for this garbage con man who makes sexual comments about his own daughter, makes fun of disabled people , and worships a Devil ( Andre Jackson) who owned slaves and Loved genocide ...
Losing respect for anyone who likes this sick Clown
I have long ago lost respect for anyone whose critical thinking skills amount to tuning in to CNN to synthesize their worldview... in spite of the countless times CNN has flopped their di cks on the table with their phony "news" coverage!
Pull your head out of the Mainstream news, erase your entire foundation of knowledge, start from scratch, and become something other than a worthless tool!
The Dude imbibes
Hot Forum Topics
