Appeals Court Rules Against the Government!

The 9th Circuit is pissing on the scales of justice the way 9th graders would piss on the ground outside to avoid having to walk all the way to the nearest restroom.

These activist judges put the "due process rights" of Somalians/Libyans/etc, who don't live in the U.S. and aren't citizens, on one scale, and the safety and security of actual American citizens on the other scale, and decided that non-citizens were more important. If this goes to the SCOTUS, then I don't think we even need a ninth justice, as a majority of the 8 already there will be so embarrassed that they actually have to review this straightforward case that they will quickly hand Trump a victory and a victory to the American people whom the Left clearly cares nothing about.
 
Thing1 said:
It's kind of fun to watch Trump when he doesn't get his way.

His sense of urgency on this is ridiculous - like the delay on this is letting thousands of terrorists into the country, when there hasn't even been one incident he or anyone can point to that this ban would have affected.

He really doesn't know what he's doing. He's in way over his head right now.
Click to expand...
the reason this is urgent is because the traitors in the gov. [about 33.3 %] are committing treasons right now, by getting key jihadist actors in the land while they can. every hour is vital as long as the damned still have some power in the damned bureaucracies. I would love it if chaffetz and sessions indicted thousands of swamp rats for treasons with undeniable evidence.. I have been watching the whole damned thing. treason. I hope there will be lawfulness again.
 
ATTENTION CHICKENS LITTLE !!

The sky is NOT falling !

"the title of this thread should have read: "appeals court rules against the people" or "appeals court rules according to will of damned" or "appeals court seals their testimony of treason"" #99

The panic manifested by the Trumpetts is understandable.

Though a Democrat president managed to keep U.S. safe for 8 full years from any terrorist attack against the U.S. homeland from foreign based terrorists,
the next most recent Republican couldn't even keep the U.S. homeland safe his first year in office.

5f615d446d13937c8546dfbe08e08062335c247.jpg


Fear is the fount that revitalizes the xenophobe.

I'll meet them half way on it.
If they think this Republican president can't do any better at securing the U.S. homeland than the previous Republican president without such extraordinary measures, perhaps they're right.

So for safety, security, & prosperity, vote Democrat?
 
Bigdog said:
They are not incompetent, they are corrupt. They had an agenda that they wanted to justify. They made a decision first, and then looked for legal reasons afterwards. They are corrupt as fuck.
Click to expand...

No doubt they wrote the decision to fit their agenda. They refused to consider the directive allowing green card holders from the 7 countries to be exempt
 
sear said:
Though a Democrat president managed to keep U.S. safe for 8 full years from any terrorist attack against the U.S. homeland from foreign based terrorists
Click to expand...
Quit lying. Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, Tashfeen Malik, Abdul Razak Artan, Dahir A. Adan, Ahmad Khan Rahimi, Mohamed Barry... all foreign terrorists who carried out terrorist attacks in the U.S. while Obama was president. He didn't keep those victims safe, and seemed more concerned about Islam's reputation than preventing future victims of terrorist attacks...

And who can forget the World Trade Center bombing of 1993 while Clinton was president, and the attacks from Ali Hassan Abu Kamal and Rashid Baz? Clinton got lucky that the bomb failed to detonate as planned to take the Tower down.
 
Trump's out of his league. He's a big man in a small sandbox when he's flipping NYC real estate.

But I saw the sound-bite of him predicting Trump victory over the courts on this.

It ain't over. But the trend isn't encouraging for Trump's side. We'll see how it ends up.
 
sear said:
ATTENTION CHICKENS LITTLE !!

The sky is NOT falling !

"the title of this thread should have read: "appeals court rules against the people" or "appeals court rules according to will of damned" or "appeals court seals their testimony of treason"" #99

The panic manifested by the Trumpetts is understandable.

Though a Democrat president managed to keep U.S. safe for 8 full years from any terrorist attack against the U.S. homeland from foreign based terrorists,
the next most recent Republican couldn't even keep the U.S. homeland safe his first year in office.

5f615d446d13937c8546dfbe08e08062335c247.jpg


Fear is the fount that revitalizes the xenophobe.

I'll meet them half way on it.
If they think this Republican president can't do any better at securing the U.S. homeland than the previous Republican president without such extraordinary measures, perhaps they're right.

So for safety, security, & prosperity, vote Democrat?
Click to expand...

first of all; you are a damned liar. second truth is that you damned subversives are building your own gallows. remember haman. the innocent blood is on your hands. damned fool.
 
Thing1 said:
Of course - just to point out that the fear on which the ban is based is completely unfounded. It's basically irrational.

To ever want an incident would be despicable. Not my m.o.
Click to expand...

Any Muslim country is more than capable of producing terrorists.
 
"Quit lying." b3 #105

Very well, as soon as you stop beating your wife. OK cupcake?

"Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev"

a) NEWS FLASH !!
The U.S. is known as a "nation of immigrants" for a reason.

b) The Boston marathon bombing wasn't staged from St. Petersburg. It was staged from the U.S.

c) I never said no immigrant has ever been involved. My comment was:

Though a Democrat president managed to keep U.S. safe for 8 full years from any terrorist attack against the U.S. homeland from foreign based terrorists ..." sear #103

b3 adds:

"... all foreign terrorists who carried out terrorist attacks in the U.S. while Obama was president."

Fantastic!

I never said there were terrorist attacks. My observation is that there were none from "foreign based terrorists".

So is English not your mother tongue? Or you just a dim-wit?

"He didn't keep those victims safe, and "

This thread is about:
Appeals Court Rules Against the Government!

It's about Trump's currently illegal immigration restrictions, which the appeals court ruled against, upholding the lower court's suspension.

PS
Here's a bonus for you b3.
"Words mean things." Rush Limbaugh

This is a thread about U.S. immigration law.

My comment SPECIFICALLY explicitly addressed "foreign based terrorists". I NEVER asserted no immigrant was ever involved.
 
"Any Muslim country is more than capable of producing terrorists." PM #108

The U.S. surely is.

Tim McVeigh, Lon Horriucci, it's a long, long list.

And both President's Bush (younger) and Obama (darker) ran predator drone programs, zapping suspects from the sky.

I don't know how many, if any, President Trump has killed so far. But I'd be astounded if the U.S. predator drone program was terminated at noon on January 20.
 
"first of all; you are a damned liar." i #107

You take me for a fool.

"damned fool." i #107

I told you.

"second truth is that you damned subversives are building your own gallows. remember haman. the innocent blood is on your hands. damned fool." i #107

Your rhetorical swagger is impressive.
It is a veritable Potemkin Village of groundless bluster.

I'm glad you take me for a fool sir or m'am. For it exposes you.

If you had a legitimate case to make it should be a simple matter to make it persuasively.

a) Step One: quote the perceived error. Not the entire post. The specific assertion you refute.

b) Step Two: explain why you believe it is an error

c) Step Three: provide a perceived correction.

Your #107 does none of that.
You've lowered yourself to name-calling.

The irony is, you may never encounter a person more honest than me, sear.
Integrity, honesty, fidelity to truth are my stock in trade.

I'll leave an open invitation to you, and every other poster; an offer that shall never expire.

If you think I've been less than 100% truthful:

a) Step One: quote the perceived error. Not the entire post. The specific assertion you refute.

b) Step Two: explain why you believe it is an error

c) Step Three: provide a perceived correction.

Please pardon me for not holding my breath waiting for it.

I know you won't
because I know you can't,
because I know I don't.

Here's an insight for you cupcake:
Reality is not defined by what you find inoffensive.
Reality is.
It's just that simple.

Happy St. Valentines Day
 
Sear wrote:

foreign based terrorists
Click to expand...

WTF? ... ALL the Islamic terrorist acts in the U.S. are "foreign based".
The acts are all committed by soldiers of Islam. The U.S. does not have an established religion. ISIS and 15 Islamic theocracies DO have Islam as their established religion. And it is foreign based Islam that is recruiting, ordering and controlling "American" Islamic terrorists, making ALL attacks here, foreign based.
 
christiefan915 said:
Could it be possible that three different judges... properly interpreted the law?
Click to expand...

No because they didn't even mention the relevant statute, which I am 100% certain you are ignorant of and have never read. So there is that.

You are just responding the way your leaders want you to respond.
 
I am not saying they won't agree, but I think even the lefty judges on the Supreme Court are going to have a hard time agreeing with this ruling.

It is being trashed all over the nets this morning, including PMSNBC which is about as left wing as they come.

The 9th Circus didn't even mention the relevant statute. They didn't even mention how the state of Washington had standing which it didn't.

This should get thrown out on the merits, but that means nothing

What Trump should do is go back and tweak the EO
 
Thing1 said:
It's kind of fun to watch Trump when he doesn't get his way.

His sense of urgency on this is ridiculous - like the delay on this is letting thousands of terrorists into the country, when there hasn't even been one incident he or anyone can point to that this ban would have affected.

He really doesn't know what he's doing. He's in way over his head right now.
Click to expand...

seems more appropriate to say he's over every liberal's head so far.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top