Travel Ban

[Grizalltheway]

It doesn't matter
Trump lost and is re-writing the travel ban

But it's not a ban.

[Chizzang]

It doesn't matter
Trump lost and is re-writing the travel ban

But it's not a ban.

[Baldy]

It doesn't matter
Trump lost and is re-writing the travel ban

But it's not a ban.

It's a Muslin ban...amirite???

[Chizzang]

But it's not a ban.

It's a Muslin ban...amirite???

All it is to me is entertaining...
The tantrum and chief



President tweeting "I'll see you in court"
After loosing twice in court...

it's like bizzaro world

[Ibanez]

It's a Muslin ban...amirite???

All it is to me is entertaining...
The tantrum and chief



President tweeting "I'll see you in court"
After loosing twice in court...

it's like bizzaro world

Tantrum IN chief (like Commander in Chief)*
Losing*

[YoUDeeMan]

It's a Muslin ban...amirite???

All it is to me is entertaining...
The tantrum and chief



President tweeting "I'll see you in court"
After loosing twice in court...

it's like bizzaro world

Speaking of bizzaro world...are you in one where you are suggesting that all people who have lost in court twice, and then gone to win in the Supreme Court appeal, should not have said, “I’ll see you in court!”

[Skjellyfetti]

All it is to me is entertaining...
The tantrum and chief



President tweeting "I'll see you in court"
After loosing twice in court...

it's like bizzaro world

Speaking of bizzaro world...are you in one where you are suggesting that all people who have lost in court twice, and then gone to win in the Supreme Court appeal, should not have said, “I’ll see you in court!”

It is just an odd thing to say immediately after losing a ruling in court.

You don't think that's at all weird?


And, anyway, SCOTUS isn't going to hear this case. The travel ban expires next month. Gorsuch still has to be confirmed.

They're going to do a new executive order, and try to do it half-way competently this time... and see if that one passes muster.

[Chizzang]

All it is to me is entertaining...
The tantrum and chief



President tweeting "I'll see you in court"
After loosing twice in court...

it's like bizzaro world

Speaking of bizzaro world...are you in one where you are suggesting that all people who have lost in court twice, and then gone to win in the Supreme Court appeal, should not have said, “I’ll see you in court!”

Don't let me interrupt your fervent defense of President Trump
Your boulder pushing efforts have been duly noted Mr. Sisyphus

But yeah...
Literally 4 minutes after losing in court the second time
He tweeted "we'll see you in court"
The lawyers hadn't even closed their briefcases

But probably no weirder than you furiously flying all over the board in his defense
That seems a little odd too

[YoUDeeMan]

Speaking of bizzaro world...are you in one where you are suggesting that all people who have lost in court twice, and then gone to win in the Supreme Court appeal, should not have said, “I’ll see you in court!”

Don't let me interrupt your fervent defense of President Trump
Your boulder pushing efforts have been duly noted Mr. Sisyphus

But yeah...
Literally 4 minutes after losing in court the second time
He tweeted "we'll see you in court"
The lawyers hadn't even closed their briefcases

But probably no weirder than you furiously flying all over the board in his defense
That seems a little odd too

You see what you want to see. Not surprising.

But yeah, lawyers, when they have an inkling that they will lose in an unfavorable court, usually already have a back up plan to appeal.

And if you think that the 9th circuit won't be challenged again, you are even more simple than you sound.

[houndawg]

Don't let me interrupt your fervent defense of President Trump
Your boulder pushing efforts have been duly noted Mr. Sisyphus

But yeah...
Literally 4 minutes after losing in court the second time
He tweeted "we'll see you in court"
The lawyers hadn't even closed their briefcases

But probably no weirder than you furiously flying all over the board in his defense
That seems a little odd too

You see what you want to see. Not surprising.

But yeah, lawyers, when they have an inkling that they will lose in an unfavorable court, usually already have a back up plan to appeal.

And if you think that the 9th circuit won't be challenged again, you are even more simple than you sound.

translation: "I had no idea the wheels would come off so quickly!"

[Chizzang]

Don't let me interrupt your fervent defense of President Trump
Your boulder pushing efforts have been duly noted Mr. Sisyphus

But yeah...
Literally 4 minutes after losing in court the second time
He tweeted "we'll see you in court"
The lawyers hadn't even closed their briefcases

But probably no weirder than you furiously flying all over the board in his defense
That seems a little odd too

You see what you want to see. Not surprising.

But yeah, lawyers, when they have an inkling that they will lose in an unfavorable court, usually already have a back up plan to appeal.

And if you think that the 9th circuit won't be challenged again, you are even more simple than you sound.

I see what I want to see... As do you
A fairly irrelevant and extraneous observation but thanks

What I do see is you working very hard to defend Trumps actions all across the board
Many of them that require no explanation or defense

But I guess everybody's gotta have a job

[YoUDeeMan]

You see what you want to see. Not surprising.

But yeah, lawyers, when they have an inkling that they will lose in an unfavorable court, usually already have a back up plan to appeal.

And if you think that the 9th circuit won't be challenged again, you are even more simple than you sound.

I see what I want to see... As do you
A fairly irrelevant and extraneous observation but thanks

What I do see is you working very hard to defend Trumps actions all across the board
Many of them that require no explanation or defense

But I guess everybody's gotta have a job

Please provide quotes where I defend Trump's actions.

[Ivytalk]

I see what I want to see... As do you
A fairly irrelevant and extraneous observation but thanks

What I do see is you working very hard to defend Trumps actions all across the board
Many of them that require no explanation or defense

But I guess everybody's gotta have a job

Please provide quotes where I defend Trump's actions.

How much bandwidth would that take?

[Ibanez]

Please provide quotes where I defend Trump's actions.

How much bandwidth would that take?

OC12, at a minimum.

[Chizzang]

How much bandwidth would that take?

OC12, at a minimum.

Defending Trump: Example #1
Go no further than his post towards the top of this page...
I'll stop there

[Skjellyfetti]

y wi

And, anyway, SCOTUS isn't going to hear this case. The travel ban expires next month. Gorsuch still has to be confirmed.

They're going to do a new executive order, and try to do it half-way competently this time... and see if that one passes muster.

And, new immigration ban issued today.

Seems to actually be done competently with consultation of lawyers and others.

Might actually pass muster!

[CID1990]

It's going to suck for people from those countries to never be able to come to America, ever


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Chizzang]

It's going to suck for people from those countries to never be able to come to America, ever

Do you promise that they can never come here...

[Ivytalk]

It's going to suck for people from those countries to never be able to come to America, ever

Do you promise that they can never come here...

Well, you just heard it from CS.com's #1 foreign policy authority.

[CID1990]

It's going to suck for people from those countries to never be able to come to America, ever

Do you promise that they can never come here...

Maybe I misunderstood all the people on the news and on the internets but they keep saying ban - that means forever ever

Or is that a straw man?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Aho Old Guy]

I suspect others have thought of this, but . . .

How long before it is revealed that Trump EXTREME vetting is exactly like Obama vetting, but with EXTREME in front of it.

Believe me!

[Skjellyfetti]

Maybe I misunderstood all the people on the news and on the internets but they keep saying ban - that means forever ever

Or is that a straw man?

You're saying it's not a ban? Something that the administration has called it many times.

Who knew a "ban" had to be permanent?

At least you make this shitty argument better than Spicer.

[GannonFan]

I suspect others have thought of this, but . . .

How long before it is revealed that Trump EXTREME vetting is exactly like Obama vetting, but with EXTREME in front of it.

Believe me!

Agreed. It's amazing that he's gone to such lengths and effort to put out something, twice, that is far more about the soundbite than it is anything of real substance. Such drama and such angst over something that isn't going to effectively stop terrorists anyway and which will not impact a whole lot of people that weren't coming to this nation anyway. But I guess because he said it on the campaign trail means that he has to follow through with it, regardless of anything approaching effectiveness. This is where the buffoonery negatively affects him - wasting time doing something that won't solve anything in the first place.

[CID1990]

Maybe I misunderstood all the people on the news and on the internets but they keep saying ban - that means forever ever

Or is that a straw man?

You're saying it's not a ban? Something that the administration has called it many times.

Who knew a "ban" had to be permanent?

At least you make this shitty argument better than Spicer.

So it's a temporary ban?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skjellyfetti]

Yeah, it's for 90 days like the previous one.