A Trump surrogate just said WHAT?!?!?

[buckeye45_73]

Trump: We should be vetting them and we dont
Reality calls: Uhh we do vet them
Trump: Well, we should be vetting hard....Extreme Vetting!

What vetting? Are you good or bad?.OK come right in?

 

[Czernobog]

Take a look at what we did during World War II, for example. We need to have the same kind of meticulous vetting that we did during previous wars because we are at war.
I can't wait to see some Trump supporter come in and try to insist that McCaughey wasn't saying exactly what she was saying. That's right. She endorsed a return to the Japanese Interment Camps that made us sooo popular, and that historians all agree was such a brilliant idea, and to use them for Muslims refugees! Because, you know, that will so encourage them to assimilate into American Society.

Undecided voter here, but she definitely didn't say what you claim she said. You should check your ears now and then for wax build up... it can create a loss of hearing.

Japanese internment camps (upheld by SCOTUS, btw) had nothing to do with vetting immigrants coming into the country. She should have used the more recent example of Jimmy Carter denying immigration to over 50,000 Iranians and sending 17k who were already here, back home. This was done on nothing more than the fact they were from Iran.

So, to what was she referring? top what "immigration" policy did she refer from WW II? The only thing we did in WW II, other than War Refugee Board, which made it easier for Jewish refugees to immigrate here, was the interment camps. So, to what policy could she have been referring?

 

[Czernobog]

Trump: We should be vetting them and we dont
Reality calls: Uhh we do vet them
Trump: Well, we should be vetting hard....Extreme Vetting!

What vetting? Are you good or bad?.OK come right in?

Actually, that's demonstrably not true. This is the current vetting process:

1. Register with the UN
2. Interview with the UN
3. Get Refugee Status from the UN
4. Get referral to the United States
5. Interview with the State Department
6. First Background Check
7. High level background check, if there are any red flags
8. A second (or possibly third) background check
9. Fingerprint screening #1
10. Fingerprint screening #2 (just in case the first one wasn't enough)
11. And, just because we like to be thorough, fingerprint screening #3
12. Review by US Immigration
13. A second review, if there are any inconsistencies, or concerns
14. In-person Homeland security review
15. A secondary approval of the aforementioned in-person review
16. Contagious disease screening
17. Cultural Orientation
18. Resettlement Agency Match
19. Multi-agency security check
20. Final security check at airport

And if any one of these checks is failed, the candidate is refused. But, you know, don't let a little thing like facts get in the way...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I have no problem with what she said. People who side with rapist immigrants are traitors.

And this would be an example of a rightwing liar.

 

[TooTall]

Trump voters have a lot in common with radical Muslims. They both want to kill all the other Muslims, they both want homosexuals to die, and they both hate the Jews.

The difference is radical jihadists DO kill other Muslims, they DO kill homosexuals and they not only hate Jews, they DO kill them as well as Christians. Only in your wild and twisted imagination do Trump voters want these things to happen.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Trump: We should be vetting them and we dont
Reality calls: Uhh we do vet them
Trump: Well, we should be vetting hard....Extreme Vetting!

What vetting? Are you good or bad?.OK come right in?

The vetting they already do

 

[TooTall]

Trump: We should be vetting them and we dont
Reality calls: Uhh we do vet them
Trump: Well, we should be vetting hard....Extreme Vetting!

What vetting? Are you good or bad?.OK come right in?

Actually, that's demonstrably not true. This is the current vetting process:

1. Register with the UN
2. Interview with the UN
3. Get Refugee Status from the UN
4. Get referral to the United States
5. Interview with the State Department
6. First Background Check
7. High level background check, if there are any red flags
8. A second (or possibly third) background check
9. Fingerprint screening #1
10. Fingerprint screening #2 (just in case the first one wasn't enough)
11. And, just because we like to be thorough, fingerprint screening #3
12. Review by US Immigration
13. A second review, if there are any inconsistencies, or concerns
14. In-person Homeland security review
15. A secondary approval of the aforementioned in-person review
16. Contagious disease screening
17. Cultural Orientation
18. Resettlement Agency Match
19. Multi-agency security check
20. Final security check at airport

And if any one of these checks is failed, the candidate is refused. But, you know, don't let a little thing like facts get in the way...

I have complete faith in the UN as well as the State Department. LOL.

 

[Boss]

Take a look at what we did during World War II, for example. We need to have the same kind of meticulous vetting that we did during previous wars because we are at war.
I can't wait to see some Trump supporter come in and try to insist that McCaughey wasn't saying exactly what she was saying. That's right. She endorsed a return to the Japanese Interment Camps that made us sooo popular, and that historians all agree was such a brilliant idea, and to use them for Muslims refugees! Because, you know, that will so encourage them to assimilate into American Society.

Undecided voter here, but she definitely didn't say what you claim she said. You should check your ears now and then for wax build up... it can create a loss of hearing.

Japanese internment camps (upheld by SCOTUS, btw) had nothing to do with vetting immigrants coming into the country. She should have used the more recent example of Jimmy Carter denying immigration to over 50,000 Iranians and sending 17k who were already here, back home. This was done on nothing more than the fact they were from Iran.

So, to what was she referring? top what "immigration" policy did she refer from WW II? The only thing we did in WW II, other than War Refugee Board, which made it easier for Jewish refugees to immigrate here, was the interment camps. So, to what policy could she have been referring?

She was referring to every hostility we've ever been in and how we handle immigration during those times regarding people from enemy states. No, we did not just open our doors to every German or Japanese who wanted to come here.

How the **** do you take the flying leap from vetting immigrants to interning citizens? She didn't talk about citizens... they were never mentioned. She was talking about immigrants coming into our country... they're not citizens and they don't have constitutional rights to be here.

You made the leap because you'r a little hack liberal shitstain who wants to gin up rhetoric and throw stupid people into a panic. I hope if Trump wins he will reenact the Alien and Sedition Acts so we can exile shitheads like you to Azerbaijan or somewhere.

 

[bodecea]

I have no problem with what she said. People who side with rapist immigrants are traitors.

Who is siding with rapist immigrants? and how are they doing it?

Apparently the OP.

How is the OP "siding with rapist immigrants"?

 

[Czernobog]

Trump: We should be vetting them and we dont
Reality calls: Uhh we do vet them
Trump: Well, we should be vetting hard....Extreme Vetting!

What vetting? Are you good or bad?.OK come right in?

Actually, that's demonstrably not true. This is the current vetting process:

1. Register with the UN
2. Interview with the UN
3. Get Refugee Status from the UN
4. Get referral to the United States
5. Interview with the State Department
6. First Background Check
7. High level background check, if there are any red flags
8. A second (or possibly third) background check
9. Fingerprint screening #1
10. Fingerprint screening #2 (just in case the first one wasn't enough)
11. And, just because we like to be thorough, fingerprint screening #3
12. Review by US Immigration
13. A second review, if there are any inconsistencies, or concerns
14. In-person Homeland security review
15. A secondary approval of the aforementioned in-person review
16. Contagious disease screening
17. Cultural Orientation
18. Resettlement Agency Match
19. Multi-agency security check
20. Final security check at airport

And if any one of these checks is failed, the candidate is refused. But, you know, don't let a little thing like facts get in the way...

I have complete faith in the UN as well as the State Department. LOL.

So...you don't trust the State Department, the UN, or, apparently, Homeland Security. So, just who do you think should be doing the vetting?

 

[Boss]

So...you don't trust the State Department, the UN, or, apparently, Homeland Security. So, just who do you think should be doing the vetting?

No need to vet them... don't allow them here. Period. End of problem.

 

[Czernobog]

Take a look at what we did during World War II, for example. We need to have the same kind of meticulous vetting that we did during previous wars because we are at war.
I can't wait to see some Trump supporter come in and try to insist that McCaughey wasn't saying exactly what she was saying. That's right. She endorsed a return to the Japanese Interment Camps that made us sooo popular, and that historians all agree was such a brilliant idea, and to use them for Muslims refugees! Because, you know, that will so encourage them to assimilate into American Society.

Undecided voter here, but she definitely didn't say what you claim she said. You should check your ears now and then for wax build up... it can create a loss of hearing.

Japanese internment camps (upheld by SCOTUS, btw) had nothing to do with vetting immigrants coming into the country. She should have used the more recent example of Jimmy Carter denying immigration to over 50,000 Iranians and sending 17k who were already here, back home. This was done on nothing more than the fact they were from Iran.

So, to what was she referring? top what "immigration" policy did she refer from WW II? The only thing we did in WW II, other than War Refugee Board, which made it easier for Jewish refugees to immigrate here, was the interment camps. So, to what policy could she have been referring?

She was referring to every hostility we've ever been in and how we handle immigration during those times regarding people from enemy states. No, we did not just open our doors to every German or Japanese who wanted to come here.

How the **** do you take the flying leap from vetting immigrants to interning citizens? She didn't talk about citizens... they were never mentioned. She was talking about immigrants coming into our country... they're not citizens and they don't have constitutional rights to be here.

You made the leap because you'r a little hack liberal shitstain who wants to gin up rhetoric and throw stupid people into a panic. I hope if Trump wins he will reenact the Alien and Sedition Acts so we can exile shitheads like you to Azerbaijan or somewhere.

Because we don't just "open our doors", now. In fact there was nothing that we did between 1939 and 1944 that wee don't do now, including immigration quotas, except the interment camps.

You keep insisting that she wasn't referring to the interment camps, and calling me names, but you have yet to tell us to what she was referring? Could that be because you cannot point to anything we did during World War II that we don't do now, other than the interment camps?

 

[Czernobog]

So...you don't trust the State Department, the UN, or, apparently, Homeland Security. So, just who do you think should be doing the vetting?

No need to vet them... don't allow them here. Period. End of problem.

So, **** the Constitution, **** our American values. Let's just ban an entire people based on nothing but their beliefs. Because...yay `Murica!!!! Thanks for demonstrating that this "Exteme Vetting" bullshit is nothing more than a smoke screen to justify Trump's Muslim Ban.

 

[OldLady]

I have no problem with what she said. People who side with rapist immigrants are traitors.

So, you also want to reinstate the interment camps? Because, you know...that worked out so well the last time...

Trump is headed straight for another McCarthy debacle and his supporters are right behind it. Morons.

 

[TooTall]

Trump: We should be vetting them and we dont
Reality calls: Uhh we do vet them
Trump: Well, we should be vetting hard....Extreme Vetting!

What vetting? Are you good or bad?.OK come right in?

Actually, that's demonstrably not true. This is the current vetting process:

1. Register with the UN
2. Interview with the UN
3. Get Refugee Status from the UN
4. Get referral to the United States
5. Interview with the State Department
6. First Background Check
7. High level background check, if there are any red flags
8. A second (or possibly third) background check
9. Fingerprint screening #1
10. Fingerprint screening #2 (just in case the first one wasn't enough)
11. And, just because we like to be thorough, fingerprint screening #3
12. Review by US Immigration
13. A second review, if there are any inconsistencies, or concerns
14. In-person Homeland security review
15. A secondary approval of the aforementioned in-person review
16. Contagious disease screening
17. Cultural Orientation
18. Resettlement Agency Match
19. Multi-agency security check
20. Final security check at airport

And if any one of these checks is failed, the candidate is refused. But, you know, don't let a little thing like facts get in the way...

I have complete faith in the UN as well as the State Department. LOL.

So...you don't trust the State Department, the UN, or, apparently, Homeland Security. So, just who do you think should be doing the vetting?

No one, the UN should establish a safe zone for them in their own country until hostilities are dealt with.

 

[TooTall]

So...you don't trust the State Department, the UN, or, apparently, Homeland Security. So, just who do you think should be doing the vetting?

No need to vet them... don't allow them here. Period. End of problem.

So, **** the Constitution, **** our American values. Let's just ban an entire people based on nothing but their beliefs. Because...yay `Murica!!!! Thanks for demonstrating that this "Exteme Vetting" bullshit is nothing more than a smoke screen to justify Trump's Muslim Ban.

The Constitution has nothing to do with banning or not banning immigrants or refugees.

 

[Slade3200]

I have no problem with what she said. People who side with rapist immigrants are traitors.

Who is siding with rapist immigrants? and how are they doing it?

Apparently the OP.

Explain yourself

I'll get right on that

What's the point of making statements if you can't or won't explain yourself... This is a discussion forum right?

 

[OldLady]

Take a look at what we did during World War II, for example. We need to have the same kind of meticulous vetting that we did during previous wars because we are at war.
I can't wait to see some Trump supporter come in and try to insist that McCaughey wasn't saying exactly what she was saying. That's right. She endorsed a return to the Japanese Interment Camps that made us sooo popular, and that historians all agree was such a brilliant idea, and to use them for Muslims refugees! Because, you know, that will so encourage them to assimilate into American Society.

Undecided voter here, but she definitely didn't say what you claim she said. You should check your ears now and then for wax build up... it can create a loss of hearing.

Japanese internment camps (upheld by SCOTUS, btw) had nothing to do with vetting immigrants coming into the country. She should have used the more recent example of Jimmy Carter denying immigration to over 50,000 Iranians and sending 17k who were already here, back home. This was done on nothing more than the fact they were from Iran.

So, to what was she referring? top what "immigration" policy did she refer from WW II? The only thing we did in WW II, other than War Refugee Board, which made it easier for Jewish refugees to immigrate here, was the interment camps. So, to what policy could she have been referring?

She was referring to every hostility we've ever been in and how we handle immigration during those times regarding people from enemy states. No, we did not just open our doors to every German or Japanese who wanted to come here.

How the **** do you take the flying leap from vetting immigrants to interning citizens? She didn't talk about citizens... they were never mentioned. She was talking about immigrants coming into our country... they're not citizens and they don't have constitutional rights to be here.

You made the leap because you'r a little hack liberal shitstain who wants to gin up rhetoric and throw stupid people into a panic. I hope if Trump wins he will reenact the Alien and Sedition Acts so we can exile shitheads like you to Azerbaijan or somewhere.

Undecided, huh?

 

[Slade3200]

I have no problem with what she said. People who side with rapist immigrants are traitors.

Who is siding with rapist immigrants? and how are they doing it?

Apparently the OP.

How is the OP "siding with rapist immigrants"?

He wasn't, blues was just talking out of his ass

 

[Boss]

Take a look at what we did during World War II, for example. We need to have the same kind of meticulous vetting that we did during previous wars because we are at war.
I can't wait to see some Trump supporter come in and try to insist that McCaughey wasn't saying exactly what she was saying. That's right. She endorsed a return to the Japanese Interment Camps that made us sooo popular, and that historians all agree was such a brilliant idea, and to use them for Muslims refugees! Because, you know, that will so encourage them to assimilate into American Society.

Undecided voter here, but she definitely didn't say what you claim she said. You should check your ears now and then for wax build up... it can create a loss of hearing.

Japanese internment camps (upheld by SCOTUS, btw) had nothing to do with vetting immigrants coming into the country. She should have used the more recent example of Jimmy Carter denying immigration to over 50,000 Iranians and sending 17k who were already here, back home. This was done on nothing more than the fact they were from Iran.

So, to what was she referring? top what "immigration" policy did she refer from WW II? The only thing we did in WW II, other than War Refugee Board, which made it easier for Jewish refugees to immigrate here, was the interment camps. So, to what policy could she have been referring?

She was referring to every hostility we've ever been in and how we handle immigration during those times regarding people from enemy states. No, we did not just open our doors to every German or Japanese who wanted to come here.

How the **** do you take the flying leap from vetting immigrants to interning citizens? She didn't talk about citizens... they were never mentioned. She was talking about immigrants coming into our country... they're not citizens and they don't have constitutional rights to be here.

You made the leap because you'r a little hack liberal shitstain who wants to gin up rhetoric and throw stupid people into a panic. I hope if Trump wins he will reenact the Alien and Sedition Acts so we can exile shitheads like you to Azerbaijan or somewhere.

Because we don't just "open our doors", now. In fact there was nothing that we did between 1939 and 1944 that wee don't do now, including immigration quotas, except the interment camps.

You keep insisting that she wasn't referring to the interment camps, and calling me names, but you have yet to tell us to what she was referring? Could that be because you cannot point to anything we did during World War II that we don't do now, other than the interment camps?

She was talking about immigration policy at wartime, dimwit. You want me to list out the presidents who've enacted restrictions on immigration during times of war or hostility? This goes back to John Adams. Numerous presidents have done this, it's not unusual and contrary to what Trump says, it's not extreme.

And yes... I will continue to insist she wasn't referring to something she didn't mention. Unless you have some evidence to suggest otherwise, just shut your pie hole.