What did Harvard Law Professor Say About Likely Outcome of Trump's Travel Ban?

[bendog]

Cherry Picked ^^^ and a lie by omission:

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

See (3) Security and Related Grounds

See (3) B, they have every right to determine if the people being admitted are terrorist or have terrorist ties, how do you do that if the home countries have no effective central government and really have no idea who is in their country or where they came from? That was the whole purpose of the hold, they want to review how these people are vetted, it was for a whole 90 days, is that unreasonable?

(B)Terrorist activities
section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX)
is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.

Cherry Picked ^^^ and a lie by omission:

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

See (3) Security and Related Grounds

See (3) B, they have every right to determine if the people being admitted are terrorist or have terrorist ties, how do you do that if the home countries have no effective central government and really have no idea who is in their country or where they came from? That was the whole purpose of the hold, they want to review how these people are vetted, it was for a whole 90 days, is that unreasonable?

B:
(I) has engaged in a terrorist activity;
(II) a consular officer, the Attorney General, or the Secretary of Homeland Security knows, or has reasonable ground to believe, is engaged in or is likely to engage after entry in any terrorist activity (as defined in clause (iv));
(III) has, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily harm, incited terrorist activity;
(IV) is a representative (as defined in clause (v)) of—
(aa) a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(bb) a political, social, or other group that endorses or espouses terrorist activity;
(V) is a member of a terrorist organization described in subclause (I) or (II) of clause (vi);
(VI) is a member of a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the alien can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the alien did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization;
(VII) endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization;
(VIII) has received military-type training (as defined in section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX) is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.

Do you believe every person who is a citizen in the seven countries designated meet one or more of these restrictions?

Do you believe every member of our armed forces should be considered a danger since the actions of McVeigh make them part of a group?

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

 

[OKTexas]

See (3) B, they have every right to determine if the people being admitted are terrorist or have terrorist ties, how do you do that if the home countries have no effective central government and really have no idea who is in their country or where they came from? That was the whole purpose of the hold, they want to review how these people are vetted, it was for a whole 90 days, is that unreasonable?

(B)Terrorist activities
section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX)
is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.

See (3) B, they have every right to determine if the people being admitted are terrorist or have terrorist ties, how do you do that if the home countries have no effective central government and really have no idea who is in their country or where they came from? That was the whole purpose of the hold, they want to review how these people are vetted, it was for a whole 90 days, is that unreasonable?

B:
(I) has engaged in a terrorist activity;
(II) a consular officer, the Attorney General, or the Secretary of Homeland Security knows, or has reasonable ground to believe, is engaged in or is likely to engage after entry in any terrorist activity (as defined in clause (iv));
(III) has, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily harm, incited terrorist activity;
(IV) is a representative (as defined in clause (v)) of—
(aa) a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(bb) a political, social, or other group that endorses or espouses terrorist activity;
(V) is a member of a terrorist organization described in subclause (I) or (II) of clause (vi);
(VI) is a member of a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the alien can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the alien did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization;
(VII) endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization;
(VIII) has received military-type training (as defined in section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX) is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.

Do you believe every person who is a citizen in the seven countries designated meet one or more of these restrictions?

Do you believe every member of our armed forces should be considered a danger since the actions of McVeigh make them part of a group?

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

They were sane and correct.

Especially the one that did away with our southern border..

Oh, wait....

 

[jc456]

Yes, and all such actions are subject to court review...

Really?

Because the executive power is vested in the judiciary?

Take a civics class, shittingbull.

All presidential actions are subject to judicial review if someone has standing to challenge it.

except in a national security situation like this. It wasn't legal what the courts did. sorry. But again, Trump can just make a new EO. and we'll get it up since he has the authority to do so. Why do we go to the congress for war and not the courts then?

there has yet to be a reason submitted by either court for the stand. None. And so far no lawyer has been able to explain how they can overrule the president who has intelligence Agencies briefing him. It is just libturds being libturds at the court level. politics isn't to be in national security. so fk them

Yes, Adolf Trump can create a NEW EO - since the first one was declared illegal.

but it wasn't declared illegal.

 

[jc456]

(B)Terrorist activities
section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX)
is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.
B:
(I) has engaged in a terrorist activity;
(II) a consular officer, the Attorney General, or the Secretary of Homeland Security knows, or has reasonable ground to believe, is engaged in or is likely to engage after entry in any terrorist activity (as defined in clause (iv));
(III) has, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily harm, incited terrorist activity;
(IV) is a representative (as defined in clause (v)) of—
(aa) a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(bb) a political, social, or other group that endorses or espouses terrorist activity;
(V) is a member of a terrorist organization described in subclause (I) or (II) of clause (vi);
(VI) is a member of a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the alien can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the alien did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization;
(VII) endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization;
(VIII) has received military-type training (as defined in section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX) is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.

Do you believe every person who is a citizen in the seven countries designated meet one or more of these restrictions?

Do you believe every member of our armed forces should be considered a danger since the actions of McVeigh make them part of a group?

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

me personally got a good laugh over the weekend when the 9th circuit basically said, hold the bus. They now realize, anyone in this country illegally will be on them. So the other six judges said, hmmmmm, maybe we should all vote on this order rather than you three libturds. We'll see what comes out of that exercise eh?

 

[Wry Catcher]

(B)Terrorist activities
section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX)
is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.
B:
(I) has engaged in a terrorist activity;
(II) a consular officer, the Attorney General, or the Secretary of Homeland Security knows, or has reasonable ground to believe, is engaged in or is likely to engage after entry in any terrorist activity (as defined in clause (iv));
(III) has, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily harm, incited terrorist activity;
(IV) is a representative (as defined in clause (v)) of—
(aa) a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(bb) a political, social, or other group that endorses or espouses terrorist activity;
(V) is a member of a terrorist organization described in subclause (I) or (II) of clause (vi);
(VI) is a member of a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the alien can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the alien did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization;
(VII) endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization;
(VIII) has received military-type training (as defined in section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX) is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.

Do you believe every person who is a citizen in the seven countries designated meet one or more of these restrictions?

Do you believe every member of our armed forces should be considered a danger since the actions of McVeigh make them part of a group?

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

You are free to file an appeal with the Supreme Court, and I'll help:

writs certiorari form Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank - PDFfiller

 

[Wry Catcher]

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

me personally got a good laugh over the weekend when the 9th circuit basically said, hold the bus. They now realize, anyone in this country illegally will be on them. So the other six judges said, hmmmmm, maybe we should all vote on this order rather than you three libturds. We'll see what comes out of that exercise eh?

One judge said, "hold the bus", asking for an en banc review. Once again a lie by omission by a trumpeter.

In a rare In a rare move, one of the judges on the Ninth Circuit of Appeals has made a request that a vote be taken as to whether the order issued by the three judges Thursday night should be reconsidered en banc, which means before 11 federal judges of the Ninth Circuit. It’s not clear if this means that this judge (who was not named in the order) believes that there are enough votes to overturn the lower court’s decision which put a temporary halt on Trump’s controversial travel ban or if the judge simply wasn’t satisfied with the panel’s decision. Regardless, it is an interesting move that could bode well for President Trump, and throws yet another legal twist into the ongoing court battle between Trump and those trying to prevent his controversial immigration ban from being enforced.

The possibility that trump loses 10-1 or 11-0 is more likely, IM (not so) humble opinion, if the court agrees to this very rare request.

 

[jc456]

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

me personally got a good laugh over the weekend when the 9th circuit basically said, hold the bus. They now realize, anyone in this country illegally will be on them. So the other six judges said, hmmmmm, maybe we should all vote on this order rather than you three libturds. We'll see what comes out of that exercise eh?

One judge said, "hold the bus", asking for an en banc review. Once again a lie by omission by a trumpeter.

View attachment 112122

In a rare In a rare move, one of the judges on the Ninth Circuit of Appeals has made a request that a vote be taken as to whether the order issued by the three judges Thursday night should be reconsidered en banc, which means before 11 federal judges of the Ninth Circuit. It’s not clear if this means that this judge (who was not named in the order) believes that there are enough votes to overturn the lower court’s decision which put a temporary halt on Trump’s controversial travel ban or if the judge simply wasn’t satisfied with the panel’s decision. Regardless, it is an interesting move that could bode well for President Trump, and throws yet another legal twist into the ongoing court battle between Trump and those trying to prevent his controversial immigration ban from being enforced.

The possibility that trump loses 10-1 or 11-0 is more likely, IM (not so) humble opinion, if the court agrees to this very rare request.

how is it that what I posted is different than what you did? I'm sorry which part again?

 

[OKTexas]

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

me personally got a good laugh over the weekend when the 9th circuit basically said, hold the bus. They now realize, anyone in this country illegally will be on them. So the other six judges said, hmmmmm, maybe we should all vote on this order rather than you three libturds. We'll see what comes out of that exercise eh?

I found it particularity funny that neither court ruled on the legality of the order.

 

[OKTexas]

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

You are free to file an appeal with the Supreme Court, and I'll help:

writs certiorari form Fill Online, Printable, Fillable, Blank - PDFfiller

No need, Trump will win on the merits and the law in the district court when the case is fully heard.

 

[jc456]

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

me personally got a good laugh over the weekend when the 9th circuit basically said, hold the bus. They now realize, anyone in this country illegally will be on them. So the other six judges said, hmmmmm, maybe we should all vote on this order rather than you three libturds. We'll see what comes out of that exercise eh?

I found it particularity funny that neither court ruled on the legality of the order.

^^^^^^^^^^^^EXACTLY^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[bendog]

(B)Terrorist activities
section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX)
is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.
B:
(I) has engaged in a terrorist activity;
(II) a consular officer, the Attorney General, or the Secretary of Homeland Security knows, or has reasonable ground to believe, is engaged in or is likely to engage after entry in any terrorist activity (as defined in clause (iv));
(III) has, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily harm, incited terrorist activity;
(IV) is a representative (as defined in clause (v)) of—
(aa) a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(bb) a political, social, or other group that endorses or espouses terrorist activity;
(V) is a member of a terrorist organization described in subclause (I) or (II) of clause (vi);
(VI) is a member of a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the alien can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the alien did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization;
(VII) endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization;
(VIII) has received military-type training (as defined in section 2339D(c)(1) of title 18) from or on behalf of any organization that, at the time the training was received, was a terrorist organization (as defined in clause (vi)); or
(IX) is the spouse or child of an alien who is inadmissible under this subparagraph, if the activity causing the alien to be found inadmissible occurred within the last 5 years,
 is inadmissible. An alien who is an officer, official, representative, or spokesman of the Palestine Liberation Organization is considered, for purposes of this chapter, to be engaged in a terrorist activity.

Do you believe every person who is a citizen in the seven countries designated meet one or more of these restrictions?

Do you believe every member of our armed forces should be considered a danger since the actions of McVeigh make them part of a group?

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

Not going to happen unless the Sup Ct believes Trump has changed the EO

3 key Trump mistakes that led to the travel ban court defeat

It's not even a close legal call regarding green card holders.

 

[jc456]

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

Not going to happen unless the Sup Ct believes Trump has changed the EO

3 key Trump mistakes that led to the travel ban court defeat

It's not even a close legal call regarding green card holders.

If you mean those that landed, you're exactly right. those are the only ones.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

me personally got a good laugh over the weekend when the 9th circuit basically said, hold the bus. They now realize, anyone in this country illegally will be on them. So the other six judges said, hmmmmm, maybe we should all vote on this order rather than you three libturds. We'll see what comes out of that exercise eh?

I found it particularity funny that neither court ruled on the legality of the order.

^^^^^^^^^^^^EXACTLY^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I find it funny that both of you didn't understand the issues.

 

[bendog]

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

me personally got a good laugh over the weekend when the 9th circuit basically said, hold the bus. They now realize, anyone in this country illegally will be on them. So the other six judges said, hmmmmm, maybe we should all vote on this order rather than you three libturds. We'll see what comes out of that exercise eh?

I found it particularity funny that neither court ruled on the legality of the order.

^^^^^^^^^^^^EXACTLY^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I find it funny that both of you didn't understand the issues.

The issue is Trump is yuuuuuge.

 

[OKTexas]

Answer the questions I asked and I'll be happy to answer yours.

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

Not going to happen unless the Sup Ct believes Trump has changed the EO

3 key Trump mistakes that led to the travel ban court defeat

It's not even a close legal call regarding green card holders.

The green card thing was fixed before the district court ruled. You can play semantics games on how it was fixed, but the fact is green card holders were being admitted. OH, thanks for posting your link from the left wing hate site, I enjoyed the laugh.

 

[bendog]

I don't play that game.

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

Not going to happen unless the Sup Ct believes Trump has changed the EO

3 key Trump mistakes that led to the travel ban court defeat

It's not even a close legal call regarding green card holders.

The green card thing was fixed before the district court ruled. You can play semantics games on how it was fixed, but the fact is green card holders were being admitted. OH, thanks for posting your link from the left wing hate site, I enjoyed the laugh.

The circuit court explicitly said it didn't believe Trump on the green card. And, Trump never personally weighed in. He had his WH counsel try to change it, and .... the WH counsel doesn't issue EOs.

Trump fucked up by issuing an EO that was obviously illegal in regards to legal residents. The only question is whether he did so intentionally just to satisfy you Trumpbots and had no intention of changing immigration policy, or whether Miller and Bannon led him to the shit house.

 

[OKTexas]

Great, then feel free to stew in your ignorance, you pathetic snowflakes are getting monotonous anyways.

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

Not going to happen unless the Sup Ct believes Trump has changed the EO

3 key Trump mistakes that led to the travel ban court defeat

It's not even a close legal call regarding green card holders.

The green card thing was fixed before the district court ruled. You can play semantics games on how it was fixed, but the fact is green card holders were being admitted. OH, thanks for posting your link from the left wing hate site, I enjoyed the laugh.

The circuit court explicitly said it didn't believe Trump on the green card. And, Trump never personally weighed in. He had his WH counsel try to change it, and .... the WH counsel doesn't issue EOs.

Trump fucked up by issuing an EO that was obviously illegal in regards to legal residents. The only question is whether he did so intentionally just to satisfy you Trumpbots and had no intention of changing immigration policy, or whether Miller and Bannon led him to the shit house.

It was never intended to include permanent residence and that was clarified to the field officers. You pathetic snowflake hypocrites always gave your dear leader latitude, it's hilarious watching you bend yourselves into pretzels in order to criticize Trump.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Oh, it's pretty clear you Trumpbots are refusing real facts on this. Not even the WH is defending this clusterfk anymore. Trump does value Miller's ability to rile up the base though.

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

Not going to happen unless the Sup Ct believes Trump has changed the EO

3 key Trump mistakes that led to the travel ban court defeat

It's not even a close legal call regarding green card holders.

The green card thing was fixed before the district court ruled. You can play semantics games on how it was fixed, but the fact is green card holders were being admitted. OH, thanks for posting your link from the left wing hate site, I enjoyed the laugh.

The circuit court explicitly said it didn't believe Trump on the green card. And, Trump never personally weighed in. He had his WH counsel try to change it, and .... the WH counsel doesn't issue EOs.

Trump fucked up by issuing an EO that was obviously illegal in regards to legal residents. The only question is whether he did so intentionally just to satisfy you Trumpbots and had no intention of changing immigration policy, or whether Miller and Bannon led him to the shit house.

It was never intended to include permanent residence and that was clarified to the field officers. You pathetic snowflake hypocrites always gave your dear leader latitude, it's hilarious watching you bend yourselves into pretzels in order to criticize Trump.

Changing the issue is the first refuge of fools, and those who lack the ego strength to admit they were wrong. OKTx has no idea whatt the intention was, and I suspect neither did trump.

 

[OKTexas]

LMAO, what are you commiecrats gonna say when the original order is upheld by the courts? I'm very sure you will fall all over yourself to apologize, NOT!

Not going to happen unless the Sup Ct believes Trump has changed the EO

3 key Trump mistakes that led to the travel ban court defeat

It's not even a close legal call regarding green card holders.

The green card thing was fixed before the district court ruled. You can play semantics games on how it was fixed, but the fact is green card holders were being admitted. OH, thanks for posting your link from the left wing hate site, I enjoyed the laugh.

The circuit court explicitly said it didn't believe Trump on the green card. And, Trump never personally weighed in. He had his WH counsel try to change it, and .... the WH counsel doesn't issue EOs.

Trump fucked up by issuing an EO that was obviously illegal in regards to legal residents. The only question is whether he did so intentionally just to satisfy you Trumpbots and had no intention of changing immigration policy, or whether Miller and Bannon led him to the shit house.

It was never intended to include permanent residence and that was clarified to the field officers. You pathetic snowflake hypocrites always gave your dear leader latitude, it's hilarious watching you bend yourselves into pretzels in order to criticize Trump.

Changing the issue is the first refuge of fools, and those who lack the ego strength to admit they were wrong. OKTx has no idea whatt the intention was, and I suspect neither did trump.

My first comment was on point fool, and it's your pathetic snowflake assumptions that have you thinking otherwise.