The Trump Administration's War With Reality

PeterZ wrote:

gcomeau wrote:
The legality of the EO does not depend on what the White House claims would happen. It depends on what was written on the piece of paper with Trump's signature on it.

No it depends on what judges say is legal. So far we have 1 more stage to go.

Assuming the administration successfully pushes things to the SCOTUS.

Why do I doubt that is likely to happen...?


http://bigstory.ap.org/article/39f1f8e4 ... an-nations



Oops. The administration asked for this report to bring to the court to support their argument they needed the ban. Homeland came back and basically said "yeeeeeeaaaaaah..... the ban is baseless. Maybe you should have consulted with us *first*."

biochem wrote:http://www.infowars.com/trump-was-right ... in-sweden/
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/rendez ... b64f96b4f2
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/0 ... /21718595/
https://www.google.com/amp/www.ibtimes. ... %3Famp%3D1?
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/225366
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/09/how- ... migration/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.expres ... ent=safari
http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/07/11/eur ... ewer-jobs/
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.usatoday ... ent=safari
https://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/justinh ... t-n2288671

It not just FOX.

I'm not really sorry saying this, but uncritically linking to content on the internet because it resonates with your worldview is like eating yellow snow thinking it's frozen OJ and going for seconds even though it tastes funny.

PeterZ wrote:

gcomeau wrote:[quote="PeterZ"]

Since SCOTUS is the law of the land and all that's happened is that lower courts have weighed in, the 9th Circuit is simply the penultimate opinion. They can still be wrong and I can still disagree with a chance for my disagreement to be correct.

I do recall typing that. I also noted that the administration testified they were not going to prohibit green card holders with re-entry permits from entering the country, even if they cam from that part of the world.

The legality of the EO does not depend on what the White House claims would happen. It depends on what was written on the piece of paper with Trump's signature on it.

No it depends on what judges say is legal. So far we have 1 more stage to go.[/quote]
2.

I don't believe the 9th have heard the case yet, just arguements about the stay.
But I could be behind.

There may also be a push to get SCOTUS to rule on the stay, but that is hugely unlikely to succeed.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Kellyanne has been corrected on her redefining of words by the makers of a dictionary.


Again!


That's when you should really know to stop making shit up.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Just found this little pearl:

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/0 ... -speeches/

Chikako Tsuruta says many of Donald Trump's remarks are so illogical that interpreters often joke they would end up sounding stupid if they translated his words as they are.

rant

So I've gotten to page 5 of this thread and I just have to chime in with a single statement before I resume catching up on the thread.

I have now seen several posts about Hillary in here, still harping on last year's mantra. JUST GET OVER IT! She is done and is now nothing more than a distraction. If anything the one thing I've seen in this thread is the tendency of the (S)Trumpets, as my Libertarian Uncle calls them, to try using her to deflect an argument that @realDonaldTrump has done something questionable.

Deflecting the debate from the President's failings or mistakes with her is quite frankly hiding your head in the sand. She's done, her career is finished. Move forward and keep your eye on the prize. Defending our constitution from those who would wipe their asses with it. Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom to Assemble... you get the point. Get over the past and face the future we are facing today.

/rant

BrightSoul wrote:rant

So I've gotten to page 5 of this thread and I just have to chime in with a single statement before I resume catching up on the thread.

I have now seen several posts about Hillary in here, still harping on last year's mantra. JUST GET OVER IT! She is done and is now nothing more than a distraction. If anything the one thing I've seen in this thread is the tendency of the (S)Trumpets, as my Libertarian Uncle calls them, to try using her to deflect an argument that @realDonaldTrump has done something questionable.

Deflecting the debate from the President's failings or mistakes with her is quite frankly hiding your head in the sand. She's done, her career is finished. Move forward and keep your eye on the prize. Defending our constitution from those who would wipe their asses with it. Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom to Assemble... you get the point. Get over the past and face the future we are facing today.

/rant

It´s especially bad considering they´re mostly using "flaws" of Hillary, that never existed/happened.
And people like PZ just gobbles it up without even a second of thought...

I mean, she HAS done some questionable things, but those are rarely brought up.

BrightSoul wrote:rant

So I've gotten to page 5 of this thread and I just have to chime in with a single statement before I resume catching up on the thread.

I have now seen several posts about Hillary in here, still harping on last year's mantra. JUST GET OVER IT! She is done and is now nothing more than a distraction. If anything the one thing I've seen in this thread is the tendency of the (S)Trumpets, as my Libertarian Uncle calls them, to try using her to deflect an argument that @realDonaldTrump has done something questionable.

Deflecting the debate from the President's failings or mistakes with her is quite frankly hiding your head in the sand. She's done, her career is finished. Move forward and keep your eye on the prize. Defending our constitution from those who would wipe their asses with it. Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom to Assemble... you get the point. Get over the past and face the future we are facing today.

/rant

We can only hope she's gone for good. But Clinton ally Perez was just elected chairman of the DNC. And there are rumors(with any luck false ones!!) that Chelsea may be planning to take a turn at bat.

biochem wrote:
We can only hope she's gone for good. But Clinton ally Perez was just elected chairman of the DNC. And there are rumors(with any luck false ones!!) that Chelsea may be planning to take a turn at bat.

Well, USA is falling deeper and deeper into the abyss of dynasties and being born into the privileged class, so it wouldn´t surprise me.

I heard that Chelsea had said definately not, but that was a year to two ago.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk