Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Uh huh.
Most Judges, unless they are totally partisan or incompetent, follow the law.Not including Roy Moore.
This is regardless of who appointed them The same STUPID remarks (DEMS PANIC) were seen under Reagan, and both Bush's.
It's just dumb my friend.
The US Constitution is what it is, says what it says.To imagine the Judiciary is going to adopt nutcase fundy christian or internet rightie "ideas" or "theories" is ridiculous, as is your post.
It REALLY makes me laugh when righties whine about an activist, liberal judge................that was appointed by Ronald Reagan.
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
LOL Yes.I have no fucking clue all right. My 35 years in law, friendships with people who REALLY run the country are trumped ( pun intended ) by you, a Goober on an obscure internet message board.Uh huh.
Most Judges, unless they are totally partisan or incompetent, follow the law.Not including Roy Moore.
This is regardless of who appointed them The same STUPID remarks (DEMS PANIC) were seen under Reagan, and both Bush's.
It's just dumb my friend.
The US Constitution is what it is, says what it says.To imagine the Judiciary is going to adopt nutcase fundy christian or internet rightie "ideas" or "theories" is ridiculous, as is your post.
It REALLY makes me laugh when righties whine about an activist, liberal judge................that was appointed by Ronald Reagan.
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
I'd say you are either a child or an idiot.....or both.But that's OBVIOUS!!!
Thanks for the laugh!
Uh huh.
Most Judges, unless they are totally partisan or incompetent, follow the law.Not including Roy Moore.
This is regardless of who appointed them The same STUPID remarks (DEMS PANIC) were seen under Reagan, and both Bush's.
It's just dumb my friend.
The US Constitution is what it is, says what it says.To imagine the Judiciary is going to adopt nutcase fundy christian or internet rightie "ideas" or "theories" is ridiculous, as is your post.
It REALLY makes me laugh when righties whine about an activist, liberal judge................that was appointed by Ronald Reagan.
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Uh huh.
Most Judges, unless they are totally partisan or incompetent, follow the law.Not including Roy Moore.
This is regardless of who appointed them The same STUPID remarks (DEMS PANIC) were seen under Reagan, and both Bush's.
It's just dumb my friend.
The US Constitution is what it is, says what it says.To imagine the Judiciary is going to adopt nutcase fundy christian or internet rightie "ideas" or "theories" is ridiculous, as is your post.
It REALLY makes me laugh when righties whine about an activist, liberal judge................that was appointed by Ronald Reagan.
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
It is, genius..they are expecting a ruling next week..........twit. The very case that shows that left wing justices...who actually stated that if hilary or obama did the same thing it would be legal...but because Trump did it it isn't legal...those are the very left wing, social justice warriors pretending to be judges that need to be replaced.
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
It is, genius..they are expecting a ruling next week..........twit. The very case that shows that left wing justices...who actually stated that if hilary or obama did the same thing it would be legal...but because Trump did it it isn't legal...those are the very left wing, social justice warriors pretending to be judges that need to be replaced.
OK, little child, state the federal law. And a link. Where did Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayer say it would be legal for Obama or Hillary? Either put up or shut up.
Yes, Yes, Yes, Ray, we know. However, it is unconstitutional for our President or our government to ban people due to their religion and the damned fool came out and TOLD everyone he, Donald Trump, would ban all Muslims. When he found out that wouldn't work, he asked Rudi Giuliani how to get around it. And damned fool Rudi told the world that, too.Uh huh.
Most Judges, unless they are totally partisan or incompetent, follow the law.Not including Roy Moore.
This is regardless of who appointed them The same STUPID remarks (DEMS PANIC) were seen under Reagan, and both Bush's.
It's just dumb my friend.
The US Constitution is what it is, says what it says.To imagine the Judiciary is going to adopt nutcase fundy christian or internet rightie "ideas" or "theories" is ridiculous, as is your post.
It REALLY makes me laugh when righties whine about an activist, liberal judge................that was appointed by Ronald Reagan.
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Section 212(f), states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
What to Know About the 1952 Law Invoked by President Trump’s Immigration Order
Uh huh.
Most Judges, unless they are totally partisan or incompetent, follow the law.Not including Roy Moore.
This is regardless of who appointed them The same STUPID remarks (DEMS PANIC) were seen under Reagan, and both Bush's.
It's just dumb my friend.
The US Constitution is what it is, says what it says.To imagine the Judiciary is going to adopt nutcase fundy christian or internet rightie "ideas" or "theories" is ridiculous, as is your post.
It REALLY makes me laugh when righties whine about an activist, liberal judge................that was appointed by Ronald Reagan.
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Section 212(f), states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
What to Know About the 1952 Law Invoked by President Trump’s Immigration Order
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
It is, genius..they are expecting a ruling next week..........twit. The very case that shows that left wing justices...who actually stated that if hilary or obama did the same thing it would be legal...but because Trump did it it isn't legal...those are the very left wing, social justice warriors pretending to be judges that need to be replaced.
OK, little child, state the federal law. And a link. Where did Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayer say it would be legal for Obama or Hillary? Either put up or shut up.
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Section 212(f), states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
What to Know About the 1952 Law Invoked by President Trump’s Immigration Order
Cherry-picking from Time magazine....Read the whole article? That is just one section from the entire law.
"Trump, however, appears to be the first president to apply a blanket ban to everyone from a specific country (more than one, in this case) since President Jimmy Carter used the provision to keep out Iranians during the Iran hostage crisis.""
The federal judges who have banned Trump's EO have done so based on his continual rant in his rallies about banning Muslims, idiot. Did you forget about that? He is basing his ban on religion.
Trump fucked himself, like he always does. He's his own worst enemy.
Yes, Yes, Yes, Ray, we know. However, it is unconstitutional for our President or our government to ban people due to their religion and the damned fool came out and TOLD everyone he, Donald Trump, would ban all Muslims. When he found out that wouldn't work, he asked Rudi Giuliani how to get around it. And damned fool Rudi told the world that, too.And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Section 212(f), states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
What to Know About the 1952 Law Invoked by President Trump’s Immigration Order
Whether his prior statements will be allowed into the argument is the crux of the case. If they are, he's sunk.
But think of it this way, a temporary 90 day ban on refugees isn't going to do much to make us safer, anyway. What would have made us safer would have been if his administration had told the IC to "figure out what was going on" as Trump puts it. But they didn't--playing coy. So the people lose, again.
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Section 212(f), states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
What to Know About the 1952 Law Invoked by President Trump’s Immigration Order
Cherry-picking from Time magazine....Read the whole article? That is just one section from the entire law.
"Trump, however, appears to be the first president to apply a blanket ban to everyone from a specific country (more than one, in this case) since President Jimmy Carter used the provision to keep out Iranians during the Iran hostage crisis.""
The federal judges who have banned Trump's EO have done so based on his continual rant in his rallies about banning Muslims, idiot. Did you forget about that? He is basing his ban on religion.
Trump fucked himself, like he always does. He's his own worst enemy.
Moron....it doesn't matter what he said...the law is the law.........as cited and as you just posted...carter fucking did it......
Yes, Yes, Yes, Ray, we know. However, it is unconstitutional for our President or our government to ban people due to their religion and the damned fool came out and TOLD everyone he, Donald Trump, would ban all Muslims. When he found out that wouldn't work, he asked Rudi Giuliani how to get around it. And damned fool Rudi told the world that, too.And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Section 212(f), states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
What to Know About the 1952 Law Invoked by President Trump’s Immigration Order
Whether his prior statements will be allowed into the argument is the crux of the case. If they are, he's sunk.
But think of it this way, a temporary 90 day ban on refugees isn't going to do much to make us safer, anyway. What would have made us safer would have been if his administration had told the IC to "figure out what was going on" as Trump puts it. But they didn't--playing coy. So the people lose, again.
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Section 212(f), states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
What to Know About the 1952 Law Invoked by President Trump’s Immigration Order
Cherry-picking from Time magazine....Read the whole article? That is just one section from the entire law.
"Trump, however, appears to be the first president to apply a blanket ban to everyone from a specific country (more than one, in this case) since President Jimmy Carter used the provision to keep out Iranians during the Iran hostage crisis.""
The federal judges who have banned Trump's EO have done so based on his continual rant in his rallies about banning Muslims, idiot. Did you forget about that? He is basing his ban on religion.
Trump fucked himself, like he always does. He's his own worst enemy.
Moron....it doesn't matter what he said...the law is the law.........as cited and as you just posted...carter fucking did it......
You don't know more than a federal judge. I bet you can't even find your own ass much less cite laws that those federal judges employed to shut his ban down.
Yes, Yes, Yes, Ray, we know. However, it is unconstitutional for our President or our government to ban people due to their religion and the damned fool came out and TOLD everyone he, Donald Trump, would ban all Muslims. When he found out that wouldn't work, he asked Rudi Giuliani how to get around it. And damned fool Rudi told the world that, too.Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Section 212(f), states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
What to Know About the 1952 Law Invoked by President Trump’s Immigration Order
Whether his prior statements will be allowed into the argument is the crux of the case. If they are, he's sunk.
But think of it this way, a temporary 90 day ban on refugees isn't going to do much to make us safer, anyway. What would have made us safer would have been if his administration had told the IC to "figure out what was going on" as Trump puts it. But they didn't--playing coy. So the people lose, again.
"...the damned fool came out and TOLD everyone he, Donald Trump, would ban all Muslims."
Exactly. He is stupider than a box of rocks. He could have restated that dog whistle in his rallies and gotten away with this travel ban. But he's just too fucking stupid.
. No example nessesary, because what is known by all is already known, and no amount of give me examples or links is going to change what people now know. No one here is like your boy Comey, who had to write notes down, because we carry the truth with us always once we hear it. It's like our guns, where as you won't be able to pry the truth out of our minds just like you won't be able to pry our guns out of our hands now.Uh huh.
Most Judges, unless they are totally partisan or incompetent, follow the law.Not including Roy Moore.
This is regardless of who appointed them The same STUPID remarks (DEMS PANIC) were seen under Reagan, and both Bush's.
It's just dumb my friend.
The US Constitution is what it is, says what it says.To imagine the Judiciary is going to adopt nutcase fundy christian or internet rightie "ideas" or "theories" is ridiculous, as is your post.
It REALLY makes me laugh when righties whine about an activist, liberal judge................that was appointed by Ronald Reagan.
And you have no fucking clue......the left wingers on the Supreme Court want to use foreign laws to make their decisions, and have encouraged other countries not to use our Constitution as an example for their own......the left wing doesn't follow the law...they decide what the law should be based on their social justice cause......
Why not give us an example??
Cherry-picking from Time magazine....Read the whole article? That is just one section from the entire law.
"Trump, however, appears to be the first president to apply a blanket ban to everyone from a specific country (more than one, in this case) since President Jimmy Carter used the provision to keep out Iranians during the Iran hostage crisis.""
The federal judges who have banned Trump's EO have done so based on his continual rant in his rallies about banning Muslims, idiot. Did you forget about that? He is basing his ban on religion.
Trump fucked himself, like he always does. He's his own worst enemy.
Why not give us an example??
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
It is, genius..they are expecting a ruling next week..........twit. The very case that shows that left wing justices...who actually stated that if hilary or obama did the same thing it would be legal...but because Trump did it it isn't legal...those are the very left wing, social justice warriors pretending to be judges that need to be replaced.
OK, little child, state the federal law. And a link. Where did Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayer say it would be legal for Obama or Hillary? Either put up or shut up.
Here you go dipshit...it was the argument made by the ACLU and ruled on by the left wing appeals court...
ACLU lawyer: Travel ban would be constitutional if a different president had ordered it
Yes, Yes, Yes, Ray, we know. However, it is unconstitutional for our President or our government to ban people due to their religion and the damned fool came out and TOLD everyone he, Donald Trump, would ban all Muslims. When he found out that wouldn't work, he asked Rudi Giuliani how to get around it. And damned fool Rudi told the world that, too.Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
Section 212(f), states: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
What to Know About the 1952 Law Invoked by President Trump’s Immigration Order
Whether his prior statements will be allowed into the argument is the crux of the case. If they are, he's sunk.
But think of it this way, a temporary 90 day ban on refugees isn't going to do much to make us safer, anyway. What would have made us safer would have been if his administration had told the IC to "figure out what was going on" as Trump puts it. But they didn't--playing coy. So the people lose, again.
"...the damned fool came out and TOLD everyone he, Donald Trump, would ban all Muslims."
Exactly. He is stupider than a box of rocks. He could have restated that dog whistle in his rallies and gotten away with this travel ban. But he's just too fucking stupid.
And obama said if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.....
The law is the law no matter if Trump said he did it because he doesn't like how they dress........judges don't get to rule on feelings or beliefs...they have to rule on the law or they are just social justice dipshits pretending to be judges.
Cherry-picking from Time magazine....Read the whole article? That is just one section from the entire law.
"Trump, however, appears to be the first president to apply a blanket ban to everyone from a specific country (more than one, in this case) since President Jimmy Carter used the provision to keep out Iranians during the Iran hostage crisis.""
The federal judges who have banned Trump's EO have done so based on his continual rant in his rallies about banning Muslims, idiot. Did you forget about that? He is basing his ban on religion.
Trump fucked himself, like he always does. He's his own worst enemy.
No, that's just more liberal lies. Trump did not ban a religion. Most people of that religion were still allowed to come here with his ban. The lying judge made it all up.
Furthermore what happened is that Trump wanted to invoke a law passed by the United States Congress, and the judge just said "I don't care if it's the law, I don't like it."
So there you have it. Judicial legislation. it's one of many reasons to keep leftist judges out of our court system, because a judge is to decide if THE LAW was followed properly--not if they like the law or not.
Stating that Trump does not have the right to place a temporary ban on certain countries because of their religion when the law clearly states that he does have that right to do so.
State that federal law, if you don't mind. And a link.
If what Trump tried to do was constitutional, it wouldn't be before the Supreme Court right now.
It is, genius..they are expecting a ruling next week..........twit. The very case that shows that left wing justices...who actually stated that if hilary or obama did the same thing it would be legal...but because Trump did it it isn't legal...those are the very left wing, social justice warriors pretending to be judges that need to be replaced.
OK, little child, state the federal law. And a link. Where did Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayer say it would be legal for Obama or Hillary? Either put up or shut up.
Here you go dipshit...it was the argument made by the ACLU and ruled on by the left wing appeals court...
ACLU lawyer: Travel ban would be constitutional if a different president had ordered it
This ACLU lawyer is a left wing judge, too?
Excuse me, let me remind you of the comment in question:
"The very case that shows that left wing justices...who actually stated that if hilary or obama did the same thing it would be legal.""
And this is what he actually said:
"""ACLU staff attorney Omar C. Jadwat argued before the circuit court panel that the freeze should be ruled unconstitutional because of then-candidate Trump’s immigration-related comments on the campaign trail. In December 2015, Trump called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”"""
Do any of you idiots actually READ something before you post?
