Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
It was Saudis dumass.
WHAT was the Saudis Comrade? The attack on the Cole?
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.
It was Saudis dumass.
Never mind, you're too lost to bother with.[
The abortion clinic laws from Texas came to mind, but it was more a general statement, as was the statement I responded to.
Can you show me which part of the Constitution speaks of abortion? I suppose freedom of religion to a small extent, still...
This limbo is not just hard for the people from those six countries, it is also fairly embarrassing that our current administration can't come up with a seemingly acceptable E.O., even on the second try.
The problem with that is the President is privy to information you and I don't have and will never get..
Can you show me which part of the Constitution speaks of abortion?
The judge doesn't have the legal right to decide what the law is but simply to apply the law as it is. The court has no legal jurisdiction in this matter, so the judge created the fiction that temporarily banning travel from six of the fifty Muslim majority nations in the world is evidence that the ban was based on religious discrimination against Muslims. Using this judge's reasoning that because nearly all the people effected by the ban are Muslims, they are being banned because they are Muslims, one could argue that since nearly all the people Obama has killed in airstrikes are Muslims, he killed them because they are Muslims.I think I'll let these Federal Judges determine what the rule of law is, rather than you. Seems to be their job.What they are not standing up for is the rule of law and you are happy about that.I'm happy to see them standing up for what I believe this country is about. Not fear. Not stinginess. Not hatred.So you are happy to see judges ignore the law and issued purely political decisions.Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!
Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.
Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."
But YES I already said if it slows down this E.O. from being implemented, I'm glad their opinions got in the way. What is so awful about that, anyway?
The law is clear and simple regarding the travel ban: the law gives the President complete discretion to prevent anyone from entering the country if he decides they pose a security risk and the courts have no jurisdiction to question his judgement on this matter. Hence this judge's bizarre lie that a ban that does not effect 88% of the world's Muslim majority countries had no other purpose than to discriminate against Muslims.
That's because Trump campaigned that he would sign an executive order banning muslims from the USA. Everybody therefore knows the 'intent' of Trumps executive order, and no matter how much lipstick he puts on that pig, its still a muslim ban.
Can you show me which part of the Constitution speaks of the Air Force?
If it were a ban on Muslims then every country occupied by Muslims would have been in the ban. Not just seven.
Carry on clueless.
Who said an air force is a Constitutional right, Comrade Brown Shirt?
[
Make that six. And the ban can, as a Trump suggested, be done in stages. Such as one country at a time, or in this case seven/six countries at a time.
[
Youi will not find the air force in the US constitution, and a strict construction originalist would rule the air force to be unconstitutional. But fortunately better minds have won out on that issue.
Old Lady claims your holy sacrament of abortion is a "Constitutional right." Show it to me in the Constitution, then.
Look, you're a Fascist democrat, meaning you aren't real bright.
Regardless, the "Muslim ban" lie from you fascists is absurd. Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, and there is no ban on them..
What it is, is a TERRORIST BAN, which is WHY you Fascists are so angry about it and dedicated to blocking it.
As I pointed out, the US Airforce is NOT in the Constitution,
neither is the president being commander-in-chief of it.
It's a derived authority. Ad is the right to privacy extended to cover abortion. Other derived ideas include that searches by the government are not limited to physical searches, but include such things as wiretaping,
[
The muslim ban is a lie, only if Trumps promise to put one in place was a lie. If you are to take Trump at his word, it's a muslim ban. If you want to claim Trump lied about 91% of what he said, than it would not be.
Chose wisely.
To use your argument, it can't be. Because Trump already stated that ISIS, and other terrorist organizations are in over 60 countries, and he's only stopping people from six or seven of them.
[
Excellent news. Much thanks to the courts for reining in our maniac in chief.
Yeah, fuck the law and constitution, Trump must be stopped!
[
Yeah, the guy that lost the popular vote by millions & millions.