I wonder, will I ever meet a Trump supporter who can discuss something logically and rationally and support his or her arguments with credible evidence?
Nah! Not a chance. Clearly, anybody who is rational and logical and can distinguish between credible evidence and “alternative facts”, wouldn’t be a Trump supporter in the first place. I mean seriously, let’s have a look at the little assembly we have here.
In no particular order, we have:
TexChik who thinks that it’s a good thing that her president has massive blue balls.
Then we have hippyjoe1955, a grown man who still can’t distinguish his left from his right, who tells us that “To be blunt the judge in this case (to borrow Obama's words) acted stupidly.”
Obama’s words? Really? I’ve hunted high and low for any comment by Obama on Judge Robarts or Trump’s illegal travel ban (yep, it is illegal, your courts confirmed that yesterday). If I may digress a little bit here because this was priceless.
When your pocket dictator found out that his ILLEGAL executive order had been overturned, he tweeted:
"SEE YOU IN COURT," adding that "THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"
To which Washington Gov. Jay Inslee replied:
"Mr. President, we just saw you in court, and we beat you."
As I said, priceless.
Now back to this assertion that President Obama said that Judge Robarts had acted stupidly, I’VE FOUND NOTHING! NOTHING AT ALL. What I did find was this:
Then there’s Jason947 who insists that the murder of 3,000 innocent American citizens was an inside job and that Trump had created 227,000 jobs, IN JANUARY. The idiot had only been in office for 11 days and had managed to “create” a quarter of a million jobs?
In comes katielass, flying to poor Jason947’s rescue. She tells us that Trump “saved” all those jobs. Sadly katielass, both Time and The Washington Post don’t agree.
Now, I know that Trump and his Trumpettes don’t like journalists, what did he call them (at his address to the CIA, who he had previously likened to Nazis), oh yes, I remember. He called them:
“the most dishonest human beings on Earth.”
But, this is Time and The Washington Post, two of the most prestigious and highly regarding news disseminators in America. Actually, in the world!
Time and The Washington Post! Two of the main players in the downfall of that other con artist who occupied The White House, tricky dickey, Richard Nixon.
But, katielass, your crowning glory has to be the mindless nonsense that you’ve posted about refugees and who can and can’t be vetted. So, “FBI and Intelligence officials testified under oath in front of congress about how these refugees cannot be vetted.”?
No shit Sherlock. Tell me, were those FBI and Intelligence officers waterboarded before they made such a monumental announcement? Under oath! To Congress!
Let’s rewind a bit.
katielass – “Why would the president ban people from Saudi Arabia when those people can be vetted.” Moi – “people from any country can be vetted” katielass – “refugees cannot be vetted”
How many refugees have there been, beating down the doors of the good ol’ US of A, from Saudi Arabia? Actually, let’s widen our scope a bit. How many refugees, from Saudi Arabia, have turned up anywhere seeking asylum?
My guess is going to be a big fat ZERO!
But, the real joy in all of this "immigration ban" fiasco, the point that neither you Trumpettes nor your idiot leader seem to get, is that, the people affected by the ban are people who already have visa’s and green cards ie PEOPLE WHO HAVE ALREADY BEEN VETTED!
@room101: You really think the politicians give a shit about the common man? We are the ones fighting the wars and dying and they are the ones who benefit from it. We are nothing but collateral to people like Bush and Obama. We are even less than nothing to the elites who orchestrated this entire thing.
Capturing Osama Bin Laden was never the actual reason the U.S. and Britain invaded Afghanistan. Gaining strategic and territorial access to the huge reserves of natural gas and energy in the Central Asian countries of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, etc., then linking a pipeline from those reserves through business friendly Pakistan to the Indian sub-continent, and through the twisted arm of Iran and annexed Iraq to connect with the Persian Gulf to the west in order to prop up certain allies of multi-national corporations competing on the 'free' and 'open' market - that was the point of the invasion of Afghanistan, and later Iraq.
And by any reasonable definition or interpretation of international law, these are not viable excuses to justify war. They are crimes against humanity, and wars of aggression. The very same laws officially violated by Nazi war criminals.
Why? He doing such a good job. He has created so many jobs already. He is being only being blocked by stupid people and cucks who apparently like to be killed by ISIS and kill their unborn babies in cold blood.
fact 1. there's big difference between creating jobs and saving jobs fact 2. time is required to determine whether such jobs have actually been saved long term fact 3. people from any country can be vetted fact 4. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is from Pakistan fact 5. Trump has not imposed a travel ban on Pakistani nationals
@room101: Well, as of today those jobs are saved. At the end of trumps term or terms we can look at it again and see how many stayed long term. It's also a more accurate way of knowing the net effect, i.e. how man jobs were really added. See, the government tells you how many new jobs each month but they never tell you how many were lost in that same month. So what if you added 200,000 but lost 1 million. But, like I said, time will tell, he's been in office for 2 weeks, hardly enough time to be bragging or criticizing.
No, people from all countries cannot be vetted. Last fall the FBI and Intelligence officials testified under oath in front of congress about how these refugees cannot be vetted. There is no functioning government where they come from and/or the records have been destroyed by bombings. There is nothing to find on these people. But what we do know is, for example, the attackers in at least one of the French attacks came into Europe as refugees, lending much credibility to the terrorist claims that they are getting their people through in the refugee process. I know where ksm is from. It doesn't change the fact that he masterminded the 9/11 attacks so I don't see what point you hoped to make. Pakistanis can also be vetted. What you don't seem to comprehend is the fact that while Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are both friendly and unfriendly they do provide valuable intelligence (it's the reason administrations from both parties treat them with friend status) and they have functioning governments. We can vet anyone traveling from those countries easily. If a Saudi travels here from, say, syria we may be able to vet, and maybe not. Depends how long he's been in Syria. The Saudis can vet him up to the point he left Saudi Arabia. Once he leaves they might or ight not know what he's been up to. so, that is why we are not placing a ban on someone because of their country of origin but where they are traveling from. It's not difficult to understand if one doesn't have cheeto dust for brains.
Why is it Brits are so concerned with our American politics ? Your government is caving to sharia and PC ... not ours ... and as you'll find soon enough ... the president has the power to remove any immigrant population he believes is a threat to national security
[image deleted] Know your history before nosing into our business
@hippyjoe1955: You see, that's the thing with context. That's why it's Lady Justice that's trying to hold Trump back. It's not about who else has implemented travel bans. It's about whether it was done legally and honestly.
Trump has banned people from countries that have never committed a terrorist act on US soil. Meanwhile, there is no such ban on countries that have. He's sold America a yarn and people who support him are buying it in their droves.
@room101: It was done both legally and honestly. The idea came from the Obama administration and had Obama not spent so much time on the golf course or appearing on the View he would have signed the EO himself. You don't like Trump. I understand that but that does not take away from the fact that the judge 'acted stupidly'. Judges do that you know. Trump and Obama had a large number of advisers telling them to do this. Trump acted on it and the judge with no insight whatsoever decided that he was wiser than all of in intelligence community and struck down the EO. Of course Trump can and likely will issue another EO over riding the foolish judge.
