BREAKING: Trump fires Comey....YOU'RE FIRED!

[oreo]

Kind of like he fired yates for bringing Russian collusion to light.

LOL.

He fired her for not doing her job. In the real world, that would get anyone fired from any (legal) job in America.

No, he fired her for doing her job.

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Well I guess you don't know what the Ass Clown did. Right now the 2.0 version is under review by 12 Federal District court judges in the 4th district court--and just the other day--Sean Spicer was made aware that Trump still had on his campaign web-site, during the daily White House briefing--the campaign promise of a Muslim travel ban--(after all Judges had seen it .) So it was brought up in court by these judges and now the DOJ is having to defend this executive order with the Pretence that Trump's 2.0 version of the travel ban- is really a travel ban and not a Muslim ban. I doubt they're going to go for that one--LOL The Muslim ban was erased from Trump's website just this Monday--05/07/2017.

"Washington (CNN)A press release touting Donald Trump's controversial plan to ban all Muslim travel into the United States was removed from his campaign website Monday, shortly after White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that he was unaware that the plan was still online."
Trump campaign removes Muslim ban language from website - CNNPolitics.com

For a more detailed explanation of why it was struck down the 1st time, and most likely to be struck down again:
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Furthermore Trump is firing anyone--Like Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey whom have intimate knowlege of this Russian investigation--just like Richard Nixon did.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

‘You can’t put in the fix by removing somebody’: Watergate’s John Dean calls Comey’s firing a ‘cover up’
In a New Yorker interview, former White House counsel to former President Richard Nixon seemed frustrated by the comparisons to current President Donald Trump.

 

[mudwhistle]

LOL.

He fired her for not doing her job. In the real world, that would get anyone fired from any (legal) job in America.

No, he fired her for doing her job.

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Wrong, see above post. The EO contradicted the law.

Wrong. The EO did not.

Now prove to me where you think it contradicted the law.

 

[Lewdog]

No, he fired her for doing her job.

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Wrong, see above post. The EO contradicted the law.

Wrong. The EO did not.

Now prove to me where you think it contradicted the law.

It didn't? It fucking listed the countries people could not get Visas from... and it included people with Green cards...

 

[mudwhistle]

LOL.

He fired her for not doing her job. In the real world, that would get anyone fired from any (legal) job in America.

No, he fired her for doing her job.

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

courts take intent into account. Are you accusing our court systems of being strictly "liberal"?

Intent?????

This not a discussion about Hillary and her emails. This is a discussion of presidential powers to refuse entry to alien immigrants.

 

[oreo]

They are a private organization. I don't like what they did to Bernie... but you know what? Someone's privacy is there privacy. What happened to them is no different that someone hacking your phone and then sending the pictures of you screwing your bosses wife to your boss and getting you fired. Well you shouldn't have been screwing your bosses wife and doing so you deserved to get fired, but guess what, the person who hacked your phone invaded your privacy and deserves to be punished for it.

You do realize, do you not, that you are saying it is A-OK for a PRIVATE company to determine who gets to run for the POTUS job.

Is the DNC and RNC a private organization or not?

Doesn't matter. The POTUS is supposed to be a representative of the PEOPLE. The fact that the RNC and the DNC control who even gets to run means that they control the government whcih means that PRIVATE organisations are placing themselves, and their interests, before the WE The People. Which is a clear assault on the Constitutional Republic that the US was founded as.

Ah yes, you mean like corporations considered as persons. Not sure how that applies here but a valid point nonetheless.

Yes. Get rid of ALL of that bullshit. Why do you agree to let a small oligarchy determine which lesser of two evils we get to vote for? Ultimately we are only voting for evil, the oligarchs don't care because no matter which candidate gets "elected" they still control them.

Face it pogo, the system is rigged against the PEOPLE of the USA and you seem to not care.

You wouldn't happen to be a Bernie Sanders supporter?

 

[mudwhistle]

LOL.

He fired her for not doing her job. In the real world, that would get anyone fired from any (legal) job in America.

No, he fired her for doing her job.

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Well I guess you don't know what the Ass Clown did. Right now the 2.0 version is under review by 12 Federal District court judges in the 4th district court--and just the other day--Sean Spicer was made aware that Trump still had on his campaign web-site, during the daily White House briefing--the campaign promise of a Muslim travel ban--(after all Judges had seen it .) So it was brought up in court by these judges and now the DOJ is having to defend this executive order with the Pretence that Trump's 2.0 version of the travel ban- is really a travel ban and not a Muslim ban. I doubt they're going to go for that one--LOL The Muslim ban was erased from Trump's website just this Monday--05/07/2017.

"Washington (CNN)A press release touting Donald Trump's controversial plan to ban all Muslim travel into the United States was removed from his campaign website Monday, shortly after White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that he was unaware that the plan was still online."
Trump campaign removes Muslim ban language from website - CNNPolitics.com

For a more detailed explanation of why it was struck down the 1st time, and most likely to be struck down again:
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Furthermore Trump is firing anyone--Like Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey whom have intimate knowlege of this Russian investigation--just like Richard Nixon did.

The travel ban was a legal document. Only it's contents can be used to consider what it can be judged on. Trump never said all Muslims were banned from entering the US. Feel free to post specifically any "THIS IS A MUSLIM TRAVEL BAN" verbage you can find in the Executive Order.

 

[Lewdog]

You do realize, do you not, that you are saying it is A-OK for a PRIVATE company to determine who gets to run for the POTUS job.

Is the DNC and RNC a private organization or not?

Doesn't matter. The POTUS is supposed to be a representative of the PEOPLE. The fact that the RNC and the DNC control who even gets to run means that they control the government whcih means that PRIVATE organisations are placing themselves, and their interests, before the WE The People. Which is a clear assault on the Constitutional Republic that the US was founded as.

Ah yes, you mean like corporations considered as persons. Not sure how that applies here but a valid point nonetheless.

Yes. Get rid of ALL of that bullshit. Why do you agree to let a small oligarchy determine which lesser of two evils we get to vote for? Ultimately we are only voting for evil, the oligarchs don't care because no matter which candidate gets "elected" they still control them.

Face it pogo, the system is rigged against the PEOPLE of the USA and you seem to not care.

You wouldn't happen to be a Bernie Sanders supporter?

It doesn't matter if you are a Bernie Sanders supporter or not. I'm one, but look what he did. He ran on the Democratic ticket, despite everything he said and stood for. He played the game... if he had ran as an Independent, he would have gotten the same out pouring of support to his campaign finances and would have actually been on the Presidential ballot. But he wouldn't have gotten the votes of Democrats who vote Democrat no matter who the candidate is, just to beat a Republican. Fact is, until the U.S. gets rid of it's party system, it will ALWAYS be this way... and the party system isn't going away anytime soon.

The way it should work is, anyone who pays the fees gets put on a ticket. There is a first vote, and say, the top 3 vote getters get to go on to do debates, and then there is a final vote.

 

[Lewdog]

No, he fired her for doing her job.

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Well I guess you don't know what the Ass Clown did. Right now the 2.0 version is under review by 12 Federal District court judges in the 4th district court--and just the other day--Sean Spicer was made aware that Trump still had on his campaign web-site, during the daily White House briefing--the campaign promise of a Muslim travel ban--(after all Judges had seen it .) So it was brought up in court by these judges and now the DOJ is having to defend this executive order with the Pretence that Trump's 2.0 version of the travel ban- is really a travel ban and not a Muslim ban. I doubt they're going to go for that one--LOL The Muslim ban was erased from Trump's website just this Monday--05/07/2017.

"Washington (CNN)A press release touting Donald Trump's controversial plan to ban all Muslim travel into the United States was removed from his campaign website Monday, shortly after White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that he was unaware that the plan was still online."
Trump campaign removes Muslim ban language from website - CNNPolitics.com

For a more detailed explanation of why it was struck down the 1st time, and most likely to be struck down again:
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Furthermore Trump is firing anyone--Like Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey whom have intimate knowlege of this Russian investigation--just like Richard Nixon did.

The travel ban was a legal document. Only it's contents can be used to consider what it can be judged on. Trump never said all Muslims were banned from entering the US. Feel free to post specifically any "THIS IS A MUSLIM TRAVEL BAN" verbage you can find in the Executive Order.

The law says a person can not be discriminated against based on their country of origin. She schooled Ted Cruz on this and I already told you this. Did you have a selective ability of reasoning?

 

[Snouter]

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Actually Cruz pwnd Yates. Ya see oreo and Lewdog, Cruz argued on the basis of the US Constitution and the law. Yates argued on ad hominems and emotion.

 

[Lewdog]

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Actually Cruz pwnd Yates. Ya see oreo, Cruz argued on the basis of the US Constitution and the law. Yates argued on ad hominems and emotion.

He did? Really? You are in the 0.001% who believe that.

 

[oreo]

No, he fired her for doing her job.

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

courts take intent into account. Are you accusing our court systems of being strictly "liberal"?

Intent?????

This not a discussion about Hillary and her emails. This is a discussion of presidential powers to refuse entry to alien immigrants.

Well when you keep a campaign promise of banning Muslims into this country on your campaign website-which was just erased on 05/07/2017 (after all judges have seen it) then you campaign on a Muslim ban--and then Rudi Guiliani who helped write this executive order--then gets on FOX NEWS and calls it a Muslim ban the Judges will not believe it's a travel ban--but a MUSLIM ban, and THAT violates the Establishment Clause in the U.S. Constitution--

Really reading has never killed anyone yet.
www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/trump_s_executive_order_is_an_unconstitutional_attack_on_muslims.html

It was a G.W. Bush appointee that struck it down the first time.
Who Is Judge James L. Robart And Why Did He Block Trump's Immigration Order?

When you elect a clown--you can expect the circus to come along.

 

[mudwhistle]

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Well I guess you don't know what the Ass Clown did. Right now the 2.0 version is under review by 12 Federal District court judges in the 4th district court--and just the other day--Sean Spicer was made aware that Trump still had on his campaign web-site, during the daily White House briefing--the campaign promise of a Muslim travel ban--(after all Judges had seen it .) So it was brought up in court by these judges and now the DOJ is having to defend this executive order with the Pretence that Trump's 2.0 version of the travel ban- is really a travel ban and not a Muslim ban. I doubt they're going to go for that one--LOL The Muslim ban was erased from Trump's website just this Monday--05/07/2017.

"Washington (CNN)A press release touting Donald Trump's controversial plan to ban all Muslim travel into the United States was removed from his campaign website Monday, shortly after White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that he was unaware that the plan was still online."
Trump campaign removes Muslim ban language from website - CNNPolitics.com

For a more detailed explanation of why it was struck down the 1st time, and most likely to be struck down again:
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Furthermore Trump is firing anyone--Like Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey whom have intimate knowlege of this Russian investigation--just like Richard Nixon did.

The travel ban was a legal document. Only it's contents can be used to consider what it can be judged on. Trump never said all Muslims were banned from entering the US. Feel free to post specifically any "THIS IS A MUSLIM TRAVEL BAN" verbage you can find in the Executive Order.

The law says a person can not be discriminated against based on their country of origin. She schooled Ted Cruz on this and I already told you this. Did you have a selective ability of reasoning?

Actually Cuba was under a travel ban for decades. You can ban anyone if their country of origin meets specific critieria.

 

[Lewdog]

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Actually Cruz pwnd Yates. Ya see oreo and Lewdog, Cruz argued on the basis of the US Constitution and the law. Yates argued on ad hominems and emotion.

She did? Is that why she cited a part of the law that was written after what Ted Cruz cited? Do you understand how law works? When that happens that means that the newly written part is accepted and takes precedent, because it clarifies parts of the original document.

 

[Lewdog]

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Well I guess you don't know what the Ass Clown did. Right now the 2.0 version is under review by 12 Federal District court judges in the 4th district court--and just the other day--Sean Spicer was made aware that Trump still had on his campaign web-site, during the daily White House briefing--the campaign promise of a Muslim travel ban--(after all Judges had seen it .) So it was brought up in court by these judges and now the DOJ is having to defend this executive order with the Pretence that Trump's 2.0 version of the travel ban- is really a travel ban and not a Muslim ban. I doubt they're going to go for that one--LOL The Muslim ban was erased from Trump's website just this Monday--05/07/2017.

"Washington (CNN)A press release touting Donald Trump's controversial plan to ban all Muslim travel into the United States was removed from his campaign website Monday, shortly after White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that he was unaware that the plan was still online."
Trump campaign removes Muslim ban language from website - CNNPolitics.com

For a more detailed explanation of why it was struck down the 1st time, and most likely to be struck down again:
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Furthermore Trump is firing anyone--Like Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey whom have intimate knowlege of this Russian investigation--just like Richard Nixon did.

The travel ban was a legal document. Only it's contents can be used to consider what it can be judged on. Trump never said all Muslims were banned from entering the US. Feel free to post specifically any "THIS IS A MUSLIM TRAVEL BAN" verbage you can find in the Executive Order.

The law says a person can not be discriminated against based on their country of origin. She schooled Ted Cruz on this and I already told you this. Did you have a selective ability of reasoning?

Actually Cuba was under a travel ban for decades. You can ban anyone if their country of origin meets specific critieria.

That's an embargo... and people could come here from Cuba, but American citizens were not supposed to travel to Cuba.

 

[mudwhistle]

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

courts take intent into account. Are you accusing our court systems of being strictly "liberal"?

Intent?????

This not a discussion about Hillary and her emails. This is a discussion of presidential powers to refuse entry to alien immigrants.

Well when you keep a campaign promise of banning Muslims into this country on your campaign website-which was just erased on 05/07/2017 (after all judges have seen it) then you campaign on a Muslim ban--and then Rudi Guiliani who helped write this executive order--then gets on FOX NEWS and calls it a Muslim ban the Judges will not believe it's a travel ban--but a MUSLIM ban, and THAT violates the Establishment Clause in the U.S. Constitution--

Really reading has never killed anyone yet.
www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/trump_s_executive_order_is_an_unconstitutional_attack_on_muslims.html

It was a G.W. Bush appointee that struck it down the first time.
Who Is Judge James L. Robart And Why Did He Block Trump's Immigration Order?

When you elect a clown--you can expect the circus to come along.

The media labeled it a Muslim Ban. What the media says isn't always the truth. And what the media claims are Trumps intentions has zero relevance to what the EO stated.

 

[Aries]

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Well I guess you don't know what the Ass Clown did. Right now the 2.0 version is under review by 12 Federal District court judges in the 4th district court--and just the other day--Sean Spicer was made aware that Trump still had on his campaign web-site, during the daily White House briefing--the campaign promise of a Muslim travel ban--(after all Judges had seen it .) So it was brought up in court by these judges and now the DOJ is having to defend this executive order with the Pretence that Trump's 2.0 version of the travel ban- is really a travel ban and not a Muslim ban. I doubt they're going to go for that one--LOL The Muslim ban was erased from Trump's website just this Monday--05/07/2017.

"Washington (CNN)A press release touting Donald Trump's controversial plan to ban all Muslim travel into the United States was removed from his campaign website Monday, shortly after White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that he was unaware that the plan was still online."
Trump campaign removes Muslim ban language from website - CNNPolitics.com

For a more detailed explanation of why it was struck down the 1st time, and most likely to be struck down again:
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Furthermore Trump is firing anyone--Like Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey whom have intimate knowlege of this Russian investigation--just like Richard Nixon did.

The travel ban was a legal document. Only it's contents can be used to consider what it can be judged on. Trump never said all Muslims were banned from entering the US. Feel free to post specifically any "THIS IS A MUSLIM TRAVEL BAN" verbage you can find in the Executive Order.

The law says a person can not be discriminated against based on their country of origin. She schooled Ted Cruz on this and I already told you this. Did you have a selective ability of reasoning?

Actually Cuba was under a travel ban for decades. You can ban anyone if their country of origin meets specific critieria.

but you can not target them by religion.

 

[Aries]

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

courts take intent into account. Are you accusing our court systems of being strictly "liberal"?

Intent?????

This not a discussion about Hillary and her emails. This is a discussion of presidential powers to refuse entry to alien immigrants.

Well when you keep a campaign promise of banning Muslims into this country on your campaign website-which was just erased on 05/07/2017 (after all judges have seen it) then you campaign on a Muslim ban--and then Rudi Guiliani who helped write this executive order--then gets on FOX NEWS and calls it a Muslim ban the Judges will not believe it's a travel ban--but a MUSLIM ban, and THAT violates the Establishment Clause in the U.S. Constitution--

Really reading has never killed anyone yet.
www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/trump_s_executive_order_is_an_unconstitutional_attack_on_muslims.html

It was a G.W. Bush appointee that struck it down the first time.
Who Is Judge James L. Robart And Why Did He Block Trump's Immigration Order?

When you elect a clown--you can expect the circus to come along.

The media labeled it a Muslim Ban. What the media says isn't always the truth. And what the media claims are Trumps intentions has zero relevance to what the EO stated.

Thats where you are wrong. TRUMP labeled it a muslim ban. TRUMP called to ban all muslims. The media did what they always do- simply report his idiocy.

 

[easyt65]

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

courts take intent into account. Are you accusing our court systems of being strictly "liberal"?

Intent?????

This not a discussion about Hillary and her emails. This is a discussion of presidential powers to refuse entry to alien immigrants.

Well when you keep a campaign promise of banning Muslims into this country on your campaign website-which was just erased on 05/07/2017 (after all judges have seen it) then you campaign on a Muslim ban--and then Rudi Guiliani who helped write this executive order--then gets on FOX NEWS and calls it a Muslim ban the Judges will not believe it's a travel ban--but a MUSLIM ban, and THAT violates the Establishment Clause in the U.S. Constitution--

Really reading has never killed anyone yet.
www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/trump_s_executive_order_is_an_unconstitutional_attack_on_muslims.html

It was a G.W. Bush appointee that struck it down the first time.
Who Is Judge James L. Robart And Why Did He Block Trump's Immigration Order?

When you elect a clown--you can expect the circus to come along.

It should be noted that the same type of liberals who fought to strike down the travel ban who defend Sanctuary Cities that protect violent illegals and who refuse to deport and protect criminal illegals who are continually released from jail only to later kill Americans (drunk driving, murder, etc...). The lives of illegals and potential terrorists are more important to them than the lives of Americans. Obama proved that when he mocked Americans for their concern over the 'immigrants' / 'refugees' Obama was letting in the country...only to have one of the terrorists he gave a visa to kill 7 Americans in Ca not long after.

 

[Ame®icano]

Which is policy making or deciding on constitutionality of the EO?

Yates position put her as the top lawyer for the FED. Her job is not to blindly cosign what trump does and says out of fear of "betraying him." She felt that the order was unlawful (rightfully so) then it would have been NOT doing her job to defend it.

Sally Yates wasn't using the executive order to base her judgment from. She was using liberal talking-points that weren't in writing to resist the lawful order of the President. By law the president has the right to decide who can enter the US thru the Health And Human Services Dept and Homeland Security.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Well I guess you don't know what the Ass Clown did. Right now the 2.0 version is under review by 12 Federal District court judges in the 4th district court--and just the other day--Sean Spicer was made aware that Trump still had on his campaign web-site, during the daily White House briefing--the campaign promise of a Muslim travel ban--(after all Judges had seen it .) So it was brought up in court by these judges and now the DOJ is having to defend this executive order with the Pretence that Trump's 2.0 version of the travel ban- is really a travel ban and not a Muslim ban. I doubt they're going to go for that one--LOL The Muslim ban was erased from Trump's website just this Monday--05/07/2017.

"Washington (CNN)A press release touting Donald Trump's controversial plan to ban all Muslim travel into the United States was removed from his campaign website Monday, shortly after White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that he was unaware that the plan was still online."
Trump campaign removes Muslim ban language from website - CNNPolitics.com

For a more detailed explanation of why it was struck down the 1st time, and most likely to be struck down again:
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

Sally Yates stuffed a rag in Ted Cruz's mouth and ran over him with a steam roller regarding this.

Furthermore Trump is firing anyone--Like Sally Yates and FBI Director James Comey whom have intimate knowlege of this Russian investigation--just like Richard Nixon did.

The travel ban was a legal document. Only it's contents can be used to consider what it can be judged on. Trump never said all Muslims were banned from entering the US. Feel free to post specifically any "THIS IS A MUSLIM TRAVEL BAN" verbage you can find in the Executive Order.

The law says a person can not be discriminated against based on their country of origin. She schooled Ted Cruz on this and I already told you this. Did you have a selective ability of reasoning?

This is the part where you cite the law or provide the link to it, since your interpretation of the law cannot be trusted.