Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

Trump backs off tough stand on green-card holders


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Angry ginger said:

his words are that of an idiot and gives everyone plenty of ammunition against him.  Someone better take his twitter away from him at some point.  

He's played the media like they deserve to be played IMO.  Now, I do question some of it but.....looking at how he crushed Hillary with a fraction of the money, almost no help from the biased media, and every single thing the Dems could cook up to destroy him, well, I think he's been "the smartest man in the room" the whole time....even if is sure as fuck didn't seem like it sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member

So let me get this straight.   You guys think that Obama has the authority to say which illegals can and cannot be kicked OUT of the country but Trump does not have the authority to say which non-citizens can or cannot enter the country.   :lol: 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/15/donald-trumps-almost-true-claim-that-the-president-has-power-to-ban-any-class-of-persons/?utm_term=.c3da7e556d17

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

The Facts

If Trump is elected president and follows through with an immigration ban on Muslims (or any other group of people, for that matter), he can do so by asserting powers under the United States Code and the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, which is the nation’s main immigration act.

Under Title 8, Section 1182 of the U.S. Code, the president has authority to use a proclamation to suspend the entry of “any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States [who] would be detrimental to the interests of the United States,” for however long he deems necessary. This provision was included in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952.

Such presidential proclamations already exist, and they were made out of foreign policy or national security concerns. For example, President Obama issued a presidential proclamation in 2011 suspending the entry of “any alien who planned, ordered, assisted, aided and abetted, committed or otherwise participated in” war crimes or other violations of humanitarian law. That means the State Department has authority to block someone from getting a visa if they are found ineligible under that criteria.

The executive branch has broad discretion through this authority. In 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that the government can deny someone a visa on national security grounds without a specific reason.

“The immigration law was designed to give as much discretionary authority to the executive branch as humanly possible, and to preclude the judicial branch from being able to review those decisions,” said Matthew Kolken, an immigration attorney.

While Trump has focused on Muslims, it was a fear of communists that drove Congress to give this power to the president over six decades ago. President Harry S. Truman vetoed the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 — and in a lengthy veto statement, he cited concerns about broad powers being granted to the executive branch, even to “minor immigration and consular officials.”

Truman wrote in his veto statement: It repudiates our basic religious concepts, our belief in the brotherhood of man, and in the words of St. Paul that “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free …. for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

But Congress overrode Truman with a bipartisan, veto-proof majority. This is an important distinction to note, as some Trump supporters now claim that a Democratic president and a Democratic-controlled Congress approved this law.

What rights do those deemed inadmissible have to due process, or to practice religion or speech? The Supreme Court has ruled that people outside the United States don’t have constitutional rights. Further, the court ruled that Congress can decide who can and can’t enter the country, and how much immigration authority to delegate to the executive branch, said William Stock, immigration attorney and president-elect of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

And over the past 130-plus years, the United States through legislation has blocked large swaths of people from entering the country. (See: Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, or the 1924 Immigration Act aimed at immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe)

 

Edited by Highmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Putting on hold people coming from other countries is fine, but how you can say the reason is to prevent what happened on 911 and not have SA at the top of the list is crazy, and casts doubt on the whole thing, then to say you will help Christians get out of those same countries doesn't help either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 1jkw said:

 

Putting on hold people coming from other countries is fine, but how you can say the reason is to prevent what happened on 911 and not have SA at the top of the list is crazy, and casts doubt on the whole thing, then to say you will help Christians get out of those same countries doesn't help either.

I'm going to surprise you and agree!  Well, sorta.  SA can suck it!  BUT...our relationship with SA, Israel, and Russia (or lack of) are all tied together.  So, I'm not that surprised. Disappointed though.  And the Christian thing is for the ones being "persecuted" in the Islamic regions.  So, I get that too.  Nobody has had their backs over there so they deserve a little "love" I guess.  I'm an atheist so I find them all a bit "off" anyway.  Killing in the name of organized religion!  Hallelujah!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zambroski said:

I'm going to surprise you and agree!  Well, sorta.  SA can suck it!  BUT...our relationship with SA, Israel, and Russia (or lack of) are all tied together.  So, I'm not that surprised. Disappointed though.  And the Christian thing is for the ones being "persecuted" in the Islamic regions.  So, I get that too.  Nobody has had their backs over there so they deserve a little "love" I guess.  I'm an atheist so I find them all a bit "off" anyway.  Killing in the name of organized religion!  Hallelujah!

So it's a feel good measure, ignore who has attacked us and paid for those attacks, while making noise about other countries, Trump will back off his love for Putin soon, count on it, he can't piss off most of our allies in favor of Putin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
12 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

 

Putting on hold people coming from other countries is fine, but how you can say the reason is to prevent what happened on 911 and not have SA at the top of the list is crazy, and casts doubt on the whole thing, then to say you will help Christians get out of those same countries doesn't help either.

No question he is missing some countries.   This is the largest problem I have with the EO.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

So it's a feel good measure, ignore who has attacked us and paid for those attacks, while making noise about other countries, Trump will back off his love for Putin soon, count on it, he can't piss off most of our allies in favor of Putin.

Well, from what I've read these countries apparently pose the most risk right now.  It's not a "punishment" for past attacks (but I'm certainly not against that), it's a preventative push.  Right now, SA, Israel and Russia are all trying to dictate where the US will "show love".  The only place guaranteed it is Israel.  We aren't going to have strong relations with both Russia and SA.  SA is VERY opposed to that.

 

Related image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Highmark said:

No question he is missing some countries.   This is the largest problem I have with the EO.  

He is missing the most important one, SA and that is the problem, it makes the whole thing look bad, I live in probably the most pro Trump area in PA and no one is happy that SA isn't first on the list. Remember how bad it was hrc got money from SA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 1jkw said:

He is missing the most important one, SA and that is the problem, it makes the whole thing look bad, I live in probably the most pro Trump area in PA and no one is happy that SA isn't first on the list. Remember how bad it was hrc got money from SA?

Friends close....enemies closer.

Still.....I fucking hate them.  They are the gateway and string holders/pullers to the entire Muslim world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

Well, from what I've read these countries apparently pose the most risk right now.  It's not a "punishment" for past attacks (but I'm certainly not against that), it's a preventative push.  Right now, SA, Israel and Russia are all trying to dictate where the US will "show love".  The only place guaranteed it is Israel.  We aren't going to have strong relations with both Russia and SA.  SA is VERY opposed to that.

 

Related image

SA isn't our friend, and Russia will soon go under the bus, and Israel will still be our favorite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zambroski said:

Friends close....enemies closer.

Still.....I fucking hate them.  They are the gateway and string holders/pullers to the entire Muslim world.

So by that logic why not keep the other 7 close too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 1jkw said:

SA isn't our friend, and Russia will soon go under the bus, and Israel will still be our favorite.

That's the way it is now.  And I think it is wrong.  But there will be a price to strain our relationship with SA.  Are we willing to pay it?  I think if most Americans understood, they would be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 1jkw said:

So by that logic why not keep the other 7 close too.

 

2 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

Friends close....enemies closer.

Still.....I fucking hate them.  They are the gateway and string holders/pullers to the entire Muslim world.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zambroski said:

That's the way it is now.  And I think it is wrong.  But there will be a price to strain our relationship with SA.  Are we willing to pay it?  I think if most Americans understood, they would be.

I think the price would be paid by people in power, not the average person and I think most average people are sick of SA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 1jkw said:

I think the price would be paid by people in power, not the average person and I think most average people are sick of SA.

I don't.  And that's not the way they work.  It would be terrorism. Which, may lead to people in power being ousted...and then we are right back in bed with SA if we are too stupid and weak to seek Russian help if we don't wanna get out hands bloody.  Probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
26 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

He is missing the most important one, SA and that is the problem, it makes the whole thing look bad, I live in probably the most pro Trump area in PA and no one is happy that SA isn't first on the list. Remember how bad it was hrc got money from SA?

Keep in mind Obama didn't list them in 2015-16 when he specifically did the ones on Trumps list.   Its in my other post.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Angry ginger said:

honestly Trumps administrations communication has been horrible,  presiding over this country via twitter that looks like they were written by my teenagers is ridiculous.  Maybe spend some time spinning the ideas rather than inciting the media might help keep the rational people in this country on his side,  the right and left wing whackjobs DGAF but reality is those batshit crazies opinion don't matter,  to suceed you need to keep the middle engaged.    

So more of the same as the last 8 years, fuck the media.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Keep in mind Obama didn't list them in 2015-16 when he specifically did the ones on Trumps list.   Its in my other post.

 

Obama didn't put forth the hold, Trump did, it's completely irrelevant, Trump used 911 as the reason for the hold, 911= SA the country that the attackers came from and the country that paid for those attacks. The Trump admin. owns this decision for better or worse. Odd that suddenly Trump agrees with Obama on the ME .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, s pump said:

So more of the same as the last 8 years, fuck the media.

he does a shitty job of explaining himself and the rationality behind the decisions of which is most cases there are actually solid reasons,  but rather than sway people to his thinking he's decided he's gonna play dictator,  exactly the bitch the right had about obama and his EO's.  In both cases it's wrong,  sell your plan like a leader would and get buy in,  he is headed down a path of being equally as bad as obama when it comes to leadership,  he's show basically none to this point he's acting like a junior high bully.  

 

 

 

Edited by Angry ginger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mileage Psycho said:

So goes Minnesota Momo :lol: 

Followed up by Momo East :lol:
 

All that's missing is the Oshawa commode cleaner Momorider :lol: 

You really need to take the word mileage out of your name 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...