Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually the judges can take the public statements that Trump has made into consideration.
Trump said he would ban muslims.
Ergo, the judges can accept that is the intent of the EO.
Can we/they also take public statements ruling judges have made into account?
Can we/they also take public statements ruling judges have made into account?
They can't. Trump didn't say that under oath. It was also a hearsay - heard from someone else without context. By saying "Muslim," Trump could very well mean radical Islamic terrorists, which are a lot of words to say.
Based on comments by former secretaries of state, Kerry, Clinton, Albright, Gates, also Michael Hayden and others from the CIA and NSA. How do we convince Muslims fighting along side us in Iraq that we are on their side while refusing their refugees, this only helps confirm the ISIS rhetoric. Besides how do we acquire interpreters on Visas while we block them from coming here.
Quote:
It's a worldwide problem. Why shouldn't POTUS do what he's legally allowed to do to protect Americans?
How many terrorist acts are acceptable to you to look the other way, thereby risking others' lives?
Yes terrorism is a problem in many countries and we need to be vigilant but we do not have the problem that exists in those countries. No refugees or Visa holders have attacked us, we have a process in place, is it working?
If he wants to keep us safe then go after El Salvador and other countries, we have had more killings by MS-13 and other gangs. That is a real problem, not some contrived danger that Bannon and Flynn came up with.
Based on comments by former secretaries of state, Kerry, Clinton, Albright, Gates, also Michael Hayden and others from the CIA and NSA. How do we convince Muslims fighting along side us in Iraq that we are on their side while refusing their refugees, this only helps confirm the ISIS rhetoric. Besides how do we acquire interpreters on Visas while we block them from coming here.
Why are we even fighting in Iraq? Isn't that what everyone on the left insisted never should have happened?
Quote:
Yes terrorism is a problem in many countries and we need to be vigilant but we do not have the problem that exists in those countries. No refugees or Visa holders have attacked us, we have a process in place, is it working?
Seriously? Have you somehow missed the Boston Marathon Bombing, the San Bernardino Terrorist Attack, the Florida Nightclub Terrorist Attack, the NJ Bombing Terrorist Attacks, and the Ohio State University Attack?
Why are we even fighting in Iraq? Isn't that what everyone on the left insisted never should have happened?
Seriously? Have you somehow missed the Boston Marathon Bombing, the San Bernardino Terrorist Attack, the Florida Nightclub Terrorist Attack, the NJ Bombing Terrorist Attacks, and the Ohio State University Attack?
Which attacks would Trumps present ban have prevented, the Boston Bombers were from Russia, the San Bernardino attacker was home grown although his accomplice was here on a visa, the Florida Night club shooter was home grown, the NJ bomber was home grown. The Ohio State U was in fact a refugee is that worthy of a travel ban.
More people have been killed by South American gangs yet this is Trump's priority.
They can't. Trump didn't say that under oath. It was also a hearsay - heard from someone else without context. By saying "Muslim," Trump could very well mean radical Islamic terrorists, which are a lot of words to say.
If it was recorded they can hear it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.