Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well to be fair Obama shut down wet foot dry foot [in retaliation]
Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason
Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason
---------------------------------------------------------------------
And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........
Don't like it well too bad.
Why play a video from an ignorant tard.
This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.
So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.
So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.
That's how it works.
The key word is "rational".
Nope, that is not how it works.
People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.
District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.
Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason
---------------------------------------------------------------------
And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........
Don't like it well too bad.
Why play a video from an ignorant tard.
This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.
So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.
So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.
That's how it works.
The key word is "rational".
Nope, that is not how it works.
People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.
District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.
What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.
I'm an American with my family (well my wife and I) on a long vacation, and we're currently in a predominantly Muslim country. Do you have any questions?Whens the last time you were able to take your family on a vacation a long vacation?
Like I said I never meet people as stupid as this in real life who think any source of journalism must be disinformation just by virtue of not being part of the network of circle jerk conspriacy sources. So it is interesting to interact with you in person, kind of. The irony with you tin hatters is you spend so much time screaming about the sheeple, yet are caught up in some cycle of assuming validity of information based on source, just like that which you abhor.Infowars is exactly where they have always been, and MSM are those who lowered themselves by becoming primal source of conspiracies, disinformation, fears and lies on much higher level.
Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason
---------------------------------------------------------------------
And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........
Don't like it well too bad.
Infowars said Bush, Jr. blew up the World Trade Center, did you buy that?
MSM lie you love to believe ..
It’s Time to Admit The ‘9/11 Truthers’ Were Right
UPDATE: GOV’T RELEASES [REDACTED] 28 PAGES FROM 9/11 REPORT
Among the numerous views held by those espousing “9/11 truth,” one central idea remains the same: The United States government is complicit in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
An article in the New York Post this week, boldly titled “How US covered up Saudi role in 9/11,” details how the highest levels of the US government not only helped conceal Saudi involvement but assisted the perpetrators in escaping the country.
<more>
Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.
^^
Bullshit
^^It’s Time to Admit The ‘9/11 Truthers’ Were RightMSM lie you love to believe ..Infowars said Bush, Jr. blew up the World Trade Center, did you buy that?
UPDATE: GOV’T RELEASES [REDACTED] 28 PAGES FROM 9/11 REPORT
Among the numerous views held by those espousing “9/11 truth,” one central idea remains the same: The United States government is complicit in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
An article in the New York Post this week, boldly titled “How US covered up Saudi role in 9/11,” details how the highest levels of the US government not only helped conceal Saudi involvement but assisted the perpetrators in escaping the country.
<more>
Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.
Bullshit
Fact, and the 9th Court has zero jurisdiction over foreign policy and national security issues, so you're just another ignorant astro-turfer repeating lies and gibberish from the usual worthless sources.
Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason
---------------------------------------------------------------------
And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........
Don't like it well too bad.
Why play a video from an ignorant tard.
This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.
So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.
So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.
That's how it works.
The key word is "rational".
Nope, that is not how it works.
People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.
District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.
What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.
^^It’s Time to Admit The ‘9/11 Truthers’ Were RightMSM lie you love to believe ..
UPDATE: GOV’T RELEASES [REDACTED] 28 PAGES FROM 9/11 REPORT
Among the numerous views held by those espousing “9/11 truth,” one central idea remains the same: The United States government is complicit in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
An article in the New York Post this week, boldly titled “How US covered up Saudi role in 9/11,” details how the highest levels of the US government not only helped conceal Saudi involvement but assisted the perpetrators in escaping the country.
<more>
Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.
Bullshit
Fact, and the 9th Court has zero jurisdiction over foreign policy and national security issues, so you're just another ignorant astro-turfer repeating lies and gibberish from the usual worthless sources.
They do hold jurisdiction over the Constitution
Like I said I never meet people as stupid as this in real life who think any source of journalism must be disinformation just by virtue of not being part of the network of circle jerk conspriacy sources. So it is interesting to interact with you in person, kind of. The irony with you tin hatters is you spend so much time screaming about the sheeple, yet are caught up in some cycle of assuming validity of information based on source, just like that which you abhor.Infowars is exactly where they have always been, and MSM are those who lowered themselves by becoming primal source of conspiracies, disinformation, fears and lies on much higher level.
That "so called judge" should be forced to read the Constitution. He is a 100% wrong dumb ass liberal progressive puke who should be impeached.The judges actions are merely checks and balances on the powers of government. Trump may be vindicated but the process must play outIt's not the President's job to interrupt the Constitution...
The President is the head of just ONE of the branches of government, he isn't a king or dictator. His Executive Orders are NOT the end all be all. No one in the United States is above the law.
For a President to declare a judge a "so called judge " merely because he disagrees once again shows why he is not suited for the job
Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason
---------------------------------------------------------------------
And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........
Don't like it well too bad.
Why play a video from an ignorant tard.
This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.
So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.
So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.
That's how it works.
The key word is "rational".
Nope, that is not how it works.
People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.
District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.
What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.
Not that you'd understand what rational is.
But that really isn't their job now, is it ?
Of course you wouldn't know.
Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason
---------------------------------------------------------------------
And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........
Don't like it well too bad.
Why play a video from an ignorant tard.
This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.
So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.
So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.
That's how it works.
The key word is "rational".
Nope, that is not how it works.
People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.
District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.
What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.
Not that you'd understand what rational is.
But that really isn't their job now, is it ?
Of course you wouldn't know.
(sigh)
OK, continue to live in your delusion. Rationality is not considered. Laws don't have to have a reason or make sense.
And you are one stupid fu........
(sigh)What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.Why play a video from an ignorant tard.
This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.
So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.
So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.
That's how it works.
The key word is "rational".
Nope, that is not how it works.
People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.
District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.
Not that you'd understand what rational is.
But that really isn't their job now, is it ?
Of course you wouldn't know.
OK, continue to live in your delusion. Rationality is not considered. Laws don't have to have a reason or make sense.
And you are one stupid fu........
Shove it buckwheat.
Typical of any left-winger...you somehow think that someone has the power to decide what is "rational".
That is purely subjective and is not what jurists do.
You've shown clearly that you are to stupid to understand what most of this country finds easy to decipher.
So, your "test" of a law is meaningless.
You might want to get a clue. There is a reason you are voted one of the top morons on the board year after year.
which branch of government adjudicates the law?^^It’s Time to Admit The ‘9/11 Truthers’ Were Right
UPDATE: GOV’T RELEASES [REDACTED] 28 PAGES FROM 9/11 REPORT
Among the numerous views held by those espousing “9/11 truth,” one central idea remains the same: The United States government is complicit in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
An article in the New York Post this week, boldly titled “How US covered up Saudi role in 9/11,” details how the highest levels of the US government not only helped conceal Saudi involvement but assisted the perpetrators in escaping the country.
<more>
Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.
Bullshit
Fact, and the 9th Court has zero jurisdiction over foreign policy and national security issues, so you're just another ignorant astro-turfer repeating lies and gibberish from the usual worthless sources.
They do hold jurisdiction over the Constitution
No, they don't, Congress does, and again they have no jurisdiction over foreign policy or security issues, no matter how often the contrary gets repeated, just because some like to hear it. This is outright obstruction and their ruling will be tossed. The cretins should resign or be impeached.
which branch of government adjudicates the law?^^Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.
Bullshit
Fact, and the 9th Court has zero jurisdiction over foreign policy and national security issues, so you're just another ignorant astro-turfer repeating lies and gibberish from the usual worthless sources.
They do hold jurisdiction over the Constitution
No, they don't, Congress does, and again they have no jurisdiction over foreign policy or security issues, no matter how often the contrary gets repeated, just because some like to hear it. This is outright obstruction and their ruling will be tossed. The cretins should resign or be impeached.
