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.
LOLOL I didn't support Obama, genius. As for false narrative, please find the relevant part of the Constitution that says the president can unilaterally ban people from entering the country.I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.
We're just not interested in your false narrative. And btw that door swings both ways. LOLOL
LOLOL I didn't support Obama, genius. As for false narrative, please find the relevant part of the Constitution that says the president can unilaterally ban people from entering the country.I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.
We're just not interested in your false narrative. And btw that door swings both ways. LOLOL
Never said his rationale wasn't that they were a threat. The idea that he's not basing it on nationality or religion, however, is obviously ridiculous based on the fact that he's completely open about it.So the countries are chosen, which is exactly what I said. Got it.
Yes, based on threat. Damn, you're not very bright, are you.
It does to anyone with reading comprehension. You said I was too lazy to post the relevant information, but my claim is that the power to ban people is not in Article 2 of the Constitution. You're asking me to prove a negative.I posted a link to the relevant portion, and I can't exactly post information that doesn't exist so what exactly is your complaint?
That doesn't even make sense.
No, it wasn't.LOLOL I didn't support Obama, genius. As for false narrative, please find the relevant part of the Constitution that says the president can unilaterally ban people from entering the country.I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.
We're just not interested in your false narrative. And btw that door swings both ways. LOLOL
Asked and answered.
Except it doesn't, as I've already shown. Repeating yourself without responding to the criticism of the specifics is meaningless.So he's specifically making the case based on the country people are coming from and their religion, but that has nothing to do with nationality or religion? Find for me in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution where the President is given authority to ban people from entering the country all on his own.I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.
It's not based on nationality or religion, dummy. It's based on national security. And yes, he not only has the authority, he has the duty.
I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.
You may tap dance around it all you like....post #65 applies.
Never said his rationale wasn't that they were a threat. The idea that he's not basing it on nationality or religion, however, is obviously ridiculous based on the fact that he's completely open about it.So the countries are chosen, which is exactly what I said. Got it.
Yes, based on threat. Damn, you're not very bright, are you.
When did they vote on it, and where does the Constitution give them authority?he has congressional authority.I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.
No, it wasn't.Asked and answered.
We know that he is banning people from specific countries, but giving special allowances to Christians from those countries. That means he is basing the ban on nationality and religion. Of course this is a side issue, because he doesn't have authority to ban people regardless.Never said his rationale wasn't that they were a threat. The idea that he's not basing it on nationality or religion, however, is obviously ridiculous based on the fact that he's completely open about it.So the countries are chosen, which is exactly what I said. Got it.
Yes, based on threat. Damn, you're not very bright, are you.
Your position is ridiculous. If it was based on religion then no Moslem would be allowed in. If the Swedes were blowing up Boston with pressure cookers, we'd probably see a ban on immigration from Sweden.
I reject incorrect things, yes.No, it wasn't.Asked and answered.
The answer didn't fit your false narrative so you rejected it. I'm not surprised.
We know that he is banning people from specific countries, but giving special allowances to Christians from those countries. That means he is basing the ban on nationality and religion. Of course this is a side issue, because he doesn't have authority to ban people regardless.
To which I replied and nobody bothered to actually respond.We know that he is banning people from specific countries, but giving special allowances to Christians from those countries. That means he is basing the ban on nationality and religion. Of course this is a side issue, because he doesn't have authority to ban people regardless.
Post #65. Your bigotry is clear.
U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.netI look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.
The Constitution’s text and the various Supreme Court cases interpreting this text suggest that the federal government has the exclusive power to enact and enforce the nation’s immigration laws.
"The Constitution says three things about the responsibility of the federal government for the national defense.
National defense is the priority job of the national government.
National defense is the only mandatory function of the national government.
National defense is exclusively the function of the national government.
Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution is the relevant portion regarding the powers of the President of the United States, and nowhere does it give the president unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country. So whatever authority is given to the "national" government generally, says nothing about what the president specifically can do.
You can sit in your chair an amuse yourself endlessly but the fact is it's been done before so I'd say you're full of shit.So he's specifically making the case based on the country people are coming from and their religion, but that has nothing to do with nationality or religion? Find for me in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution where the President is given authority to ban people from entering the country all on his own.I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.
It's not based on nationality or religion, dummy. It's based on national security. And yes, he not only has the authority, he has the duty.
I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.
The Constitution grants to the Federal Government sole authority on Immigration and relevant laws grant to the President the power to ban a country or Countries based on his order.U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.netI look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.
The Constitution’s text and the various Supreme Court cases interpreting this text suggest that the federal government has the exclusive power to enact and enforce the nation’s immigration laws.
"The Constitution says three things about the responsibility of the federal government for the national defense.
National defense is the priority job of the national government.
National defense is the only mandatory function of the national government.
National defense is exclusively the function of the national government.
Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution is the relevant portion regarding the powers of the President of the United States, and nowhere does it give the president unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country. So whatever authority is given to the "national" government generally, says nothing about what the president specifically can do.
The Congress granted the President the power dumb ass. Or are you arguing the Federal Government does not control immigration. Already linked for you.LOLOL I didn't support Obama, genius. As for false narrative, please find the relevant part of the Constitution that says the president can unilaterally ban people from entering the country.I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.
We're just not interested in your false narrative. And btw that door swings both ways. LOLOL
Sssshhh...he's busy amusing himself. Let him finish and mop up the mess first.The Congress granted the President the power dumb ass. Or are you arguing the Federal Government does not control immigration. Already linked for you.LOLOL I didn't support Obama, genius. As for false narrative, please find the relevant part of the Constitution that says the president can unilaterally ban people from entering the country.I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.
We're just not interested in your false narrative. And btw that door swings both ways. LOLOL
Sssshhh...he's busy amusing himself. Let him finish and mop up the mess first.The Congress granted the President the power dumb ass. Or are you arguing the Federal Government does not control immigration. Already linked for you.LOLOL I didn't support Obama, genius. As for false narrative, please find the relevant part of the Constitution that says the president can unilaterally ban people from entering the country.I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.
We're just not interested in your false narrative. And btw that door swings both ways. LOLOL
