Judge blocking Trump border defense is TREASON

[MindWars]

Well to be fair Obama shut down wet foot dry foot [in retaliation]

That he did. I remember Alex talking about it last week some what and there was a reason for it and of course it's not for the better it actually makes it better for them not us. I can't remember exactly everything he said at the moment though.

 

[MindWars]

Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason

 

[rdean]

Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason



---------------------------------------------------------------------

And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........

Don't like it well too bad.

Why play a video from an ignorant tard.

This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.

So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.

So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.

That's how it works.

The key word is "rational".

Nope, that is not how it works.

People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.

District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.

What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason



---------------------------------------------------------------------

And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........

Don't like it well too bad.

Why play a video from an ignorant tard.

This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.

So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.

So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.

That's how it works.

The key word is "rational".

Nope, that is not how it works.

People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.

District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.

What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.

Not that you'd understand what rational is.

But that really isn't their job now, is it ?

Of course you wouldn't know.

 

[DrainBamage]

Whens the last time you were able to take your family on a vacation a long vacation?

I'm an American with my family (well my wife and I) on a long vacation, and we're currently in a predominantly Muslim country. Do you have any questions?

 

[DrainBamage]

Infowars is exactly where they have always been, and MSM are those who lowered themselves by becoming primal source of conspiracies, disinformation, fears and lies on much higher level.

Like I said I never meet people as stupid as this in real life who think any source of journalism must be disinformation just by virtue of not being part of the network of circle jerk conspriacy sources. So it is interesting to interact with you in person, kind of. The irony with you tin hatters is you spend so much time screaming about the sheeple, yet are caught up in some cycle of assuming validity of information based on source, just like that which you abhor.

 

[Picaro]

Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason



---------------------------------------------------------------------

And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........

Don't like it well too bad.

Infowars said Bush, Jr. blew up the World Trade Center, did you buy that?

MSM lie you love to believe ..

It’s Time to Admit The ‘9/11 Truthers’ Were Right

UPDATE: GOV’T RELEASES [REDACTED] 28 PAGES FROM 9/11 REPORT

Among the numerous views held by those espousing “9/11 truth,” one central idea remains the same: The United States government is complicit in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
An article in the New York Post this week, boldly titled “How US covered up Saudi role in 9/11,” details how the highest levels of the US government not only helped conceal Saudi involvement but assisted the perpetrators in escaping the country.
<more>

Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.

^^
Bullshit

Fact, and the 9th Court has zero jurisdiction over foreign policy and national security issues, so you're just another ignorant astro-turfer repeating lies and gibberish from the usual worthless sources.

 

[rightwinger]

Infowars said Bush, Jr. blew up the World Trade Center, did you buy that?

MSM lie you love to believe ..

It’s Time to Admit The ‘9/11 Truthers’ Were Right

UPDATE: GOV’T RELEASES [REDACTED] 28 PAGES FROM 9/11 REPORT

Among the numerous views held by those espousing “9/11 truth,” one central idea remains the same: The United States government is complicit in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
An article in the New York Post this week, boldly titled “How US covered up Saudi role in 9/11,” details how the highest levels of the US government not only helped conceal Saudi involvement but assisted the perpetrators in escaping the country.
<more>

Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.

^^
Bullshit

Fact, and the 9th Court has zero jurisdiction over foreign policy and national security issues, so you're just another ignorant astro-turfer repeating lies and gibberish from the usual worthless sources.

They do hold jurisdiction over the Constitution

 

[Ame®icano]

Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason



---------------------------------------------------------------------

And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........

Don't like it well too bad.

Why play a video from an ignorant tard.

This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.

So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.

So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.

That's how it works.

The key word is "rational".

Nope, that is not how it works.

People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.

District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.

What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.

Wrong again.

Judge has no jurisdiction to ask if is rational or not, but if is constitutional or not.

 

[Picaro]

MSM lie you love to believe ..

It’s Time to Admit The ‘9/11 Truthers’ Were Right

UPDATE: GOV’T RELEASES [REDACTED] 28 PAGES FROM 9/11 REPORT

Among the numerous views held by those espousing “9/11 truth,” one central idea remains the same: The United States government is complicit in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
An article in the New York Post this week, boldly titled “How US covered up Saudi role in 9/11,” details how the highest levels of the US government not only helped conceal Saudi involvement but assisted the perpetrators in escaping the country.
<more>

Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.

^^
Bullshit

Fact, and the 9th Court has zero jurisdiction over foreign policy and national security issues, so you're just another ignorant astro-turfer repeating lies and gibberish from the usual worthless sources.

They do hold jurisdiction over the Constitution

No, they don't, Congress does, and again they have no jurisdiction over foreign policy or security issues, no matter how often the contrary gets repeated, just because some like to hear it. This is outright obstruction and their ruling will be tossed. The cretins should resign or be impeached.

 

[Ame®icano]

Infowars is exactly where they have always been, and MSM are those who lowered themselves by becoming primal source of conspiracies, disinformation, fears and lies on much higher level.

Like I said I never meet people as stupid as this in real life who think any source of journalism must be disinformation just by virtue of not being part of the network of circle jerk conspriacy sources. So it is interesting to interact with you in person, kind of. The irony with you tin hatters is you spend so much time screaming about the sheeple, yet are caught up in some cycle of assuming validity of information based on source, just like that which you abhor.

And where exactly I've said that Infowars are journalists? Point it out, please.

By the way, in what predominantly Muslim country you are now? Just curious.

 

[OldLady]

Did anyone watch the oral arguments last night?

 

[Hossfly]

It's not the President's job to interrupt the Constitution...

The President is the head of just ONE of the branches of government, he isn't a king or dictator. His Executive Orders are NOT the end all be all. No one in the United States is above the law.

The judges actions are merely checks and balances on the powers of government. Trump may be vindicated but the process must play out

For a President to declare a judge a "so called judge " merely because he disagrees once again shows why he is not suited for the job

That "so called judge" should be forced to read the Constitution. He is a 100% wrong dumb ass liberal progressive puke who should be impeached.

 

[rdean]

Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason



---------------------------------------------------------------------

And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........

Don't like it well too bad.

Why play a video from an ignorant tard.

This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.

So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.

So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.

That's how it works.

The key word is "rational".

Nope, that is not how it works.

People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.

District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.

What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.

Not that you'd understand what rational is.

But that really isn't their job now, is it ?

Of course you wouldn't know.

(sigh)

OK, continue to live in your delusion. Rationality is not considered. Laws don't have to have a reason or make sense.

And you are one stupid fu........

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Bush appointee attempting to stop Trump from securing borders
Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason



---------------------------------------------------------------------

And I really won't care about your snarky ass comments because if anybody knows our laws and constitution it is this guy. He has informed lawyers etc who know what is a criminal act etc..........

Don't like it well too bad.

Why play a video from an ignorant tard.

This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.

So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.

So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.

That's how it works.

The key word is "rational".

Nope, that is not how it works.

People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.

District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.

What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.

Not that you'd understand what rational is.

But that really isn't their job now, is it ?

Of course you wouldn't know.

(sigh)

OK, continue to live in your delusion. Rationality is not considered. Laws don't have to have a reason or make sense.

And you are one stupid fu........

Shove it buckwheat.

Typical of any left-winger...you somehow think that someone has the power to decide what is "rational".

That is purely subjective and is not what jurists do.

You've shown clearly that you are to stupid to understand what most of this country finds easy to decipher.

So, your "test" of a law is meaningless.

You might want to get a clue. There is a reason you are voted one of the top morons on the board year after year.

 

[Syriusly]

Judge Blocking Trump Border Defense Is Treason

Not surprising that Mindwars thinks anyone acting to protect our Constitution is committing treason.

 

[Ame®icano]

Why play a video from an ignorant tard.

This is how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. There has to be a rational reason for the law. When the judges asked the Trump Administration if anyone from any of those seven countries ever attacked this country, they had to say no. At first, they said it was because of 9/11, only none of those 9/11 attackers came from any of those seven countries.

So so far, from the Trump administration the only factor that could be found is religious discrimination and Trump doesn't have any property in any of those countries.

So if they can figure out a way to make this ban "rational", then Trump has a good chance of winning.

That's how it works.

The key word is "rational".

Nope, that is not how it works.

People overseas with no connection to this country don't have our constitutional rights. We do not export our constitutional rights to citizens of other countries. If they have a right to come to this country as that judge assumes, than 7 billion people can exercise that right and come here. Why don't they? Because constitution doesn't give our constitutional rights to citizens in other countries.

District courts do not have the jurisdiction over immigration, period.

What I wrote is EXACTLY how it works. You can't make a law to make a law. The first thing the Judge(s) will ask is if it's rational. If they don't see it as rational, they won't even look at it.
Try to think it through. Figure out why it must be rational.

Not that you'd understand what rational is.

But that really isn't their job now, is it ?

Of course you wouldn't know.

(sigh)

OK, continue to live in your delusion. Rationality is not considered. Laws don't have to have a reason or make sense.

And you are one stupid fu........

Shove it buckwheat.

Typical of any left-winger...you somehow think that someone has the power to decide what is "rational".

That is purely subjective and is not what jurists do.

You've shown clearly that you are to stupid to understand what most of this country finds easy to decipher.

So, your "test" of a law is meaningless.

You might want to get a clue. There is a reason you are voted one of the top morons on the board year after year.

"Top Moron"... kek.

 

[koshergrl]

View attachment 110754

The millennial grubs think that it's patriotic to dress up in black ninja clothes and run around beating up people on college campuses and on capitol steps.

 

[danielpalos]

It’s Time to Admit The ‘9/11 Truthers’ Were Right

UPDATE: GOV’T RELEASES [REDACTED] 28 PAGES FROM 9/11 REPORT

Among the numerous views held by those espousing “9/11 truth,” one central idea remains the same: The United States government is complicit in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
An article in the New York Post this week, boldly titled “How US covered up Saudi role in 9/11,” details how the highest levels of the US government not only helped conceal Saudi involvement but assisted the perpetrators in escaping the country.
<more>

Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.

^^
Bullshit

Fact, and the 9th Court has zero jurisdiction over foreign policy and national security issues, so you're just another ignorant astro-turfer repeating lies and gibberish from the usual worthless sources.

They do hold jurisdiction over the Constitution

No, they don't, Congress does, and again they have no jurisdiction over foreign policy or security issues, no matter how often the contrary gets repeated, just because some like to hear it. This is outright obstruction and their ruling will be tossed. The cretins should resign or be impeached.

which branch of government adjudicates the law?

 

[Picaro]

Obama and Hillary funded ISIS for years. No whining about that from you that I can find. And we can bet some Obama loyalist somewhere in the woodwork tipped off the terrorists targeted by the SEAL teams in Yemen, getting one of them killed.

^^
Bullshit

Fact, and the 9th Court has zero jurisdiction over foreign policy and national security issues, so you're just another ignorant astro-turfer repeating lies and gibberish from the usual worthless sources.

They do hold jurisdiction over the Constitution

No, they don't, Congress does, and again they have no jurisdiction over foreign policy or security issues, no matter how often the contrary gets repeated, just because some like to hear it. This is outright obstruction and their ruling will be tossed. The cretins should resign or be impeached.

which branch of government adjudicates the law?

You're making no sense here. Are you claiming a lower Court Judge can unilaterally suspend a President's law enforcement and national security actions, just by merely saying so? They have no such powers, and never did.

And, there is nothing for them to 'adjudicate' in Trump's orders. He wasn't making law, he was enforcing some. Learn the difference.