visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfitzo53 Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Yes, because people who want to do harm are going to come in carrying dirty phones and volunteer the credentials for their sensitive emails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Quote Trump also pushed Chicago police to tell federal immigration authorities who the undocumented gang members are. “I want you to turn in the bad ones. Call Secretary Kelly’s representatives and we’ll get them out of our country and bring them back where they came from, and we’ll do it fast,” Trump said. Chicago is among several cities that have doubled down as sanctuaries for immigrants after Trump won the White House. Days after the election, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel sought to assure the city’s residents. “To all those who are, after Tuesday’s election, very nervous and filled with anxiety as we’ve spoken to, you are safe in Chicago, you are secure in Chicago, and you are supported in Chicago,” Emanuel said. Emanuel’s spokesman Matt McGrath criticized Trump, in a statement to NBC Chicago, but said the mayor would be willing to work with federal officials. “With all the talk and no action, you have to wonder whether the administration is serious about working with us on solutions, or if they are just using violence in this great city to score political points,” McGrath said. “We’ve been clear, there are ways the federal government can help, and we’re happy to partner with the new administration whenever they decide to stop talking and start acting,” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) Quote U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia, will hold a hearing Friday on whether to block President Donald Trump’s Jan. 27 order barring immigration from seven majority-Muslim countries at the request of state Attorney General Mark Herring. U.S. lawyers made their argument in a filing late Wednesday. An appeals court in San Francisco is poised to rule on whether to reinstate the president’s temporary ban on immigration from seven nations, which was halted by a judge in Seattle. That ruling -- or similar suits in Massachusetts, Maryland and elsewhere -- may ultimately emerge as the policy-setter in the high-stakes battle over the extent of President Trump’s authority. The case list grew Thursday, as a suit was filed in Washington D.C. on behalf of several individuals and four Iranian-American organizations to overturn restrictions on people traveling to and from Iran. Brinkema on Feb. 3 allowed Virginia to take the lead in a civil lawsuit challenging Trump’s ban, which was filed by two Yemeni brothers who claim they were tricked into leaving the country while traveling to visit their father in Michigan. The judge also extended to Friday a temporary restraining order barring the federal government from enforcing the president’s ban as it might apply to legal permanent U.S. residents including green-card holders and those with work visas. Friday’s hearing will be the most in-depth analysis to date of the arguments against the travel ban, Michael Kelly, a spokesman for Herring, said in a statement. Other hearings have focused on a temporary halt to the ban, while Herring is seeking a longer injunction that would put it on hold until a trial could be held, which could take weeks or months. Quote An hour after Guadalupe García de Rayos was deported from the United States on Thursday, her 14-year-old girl stood in front of cameras and microphones fighting back tears. “I honestly don’t have any words,” Jaqueline Rayos García said, speaking at a press conference. For the past eight years, Garcia’s mother, who had lived in the U.S. for 21 years, had routinely checked in with immigration officials and was allowed to walk free because she was not considered a priority for deportation. But on Wednesday, she went to a check-in at the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in downtown Phoenix on and never returned. ICE officials detained her and deported her hours later because she was caught using a fake Social Security number during a raid at the water park where she worked. She was sent to Nogales, Mexico. Speaking to reporters, her attorney Ray A. Ybarra Maldonado said he believes that executive orders recently signed by President Donald Trump led to her deportation. Edited February 9, 2017 by visionary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) Edited February 9, 2017 by visionary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) edit..beaten to the punch. Next step..Trump 3am twit tirade. Edited February 9, 2017 by The Evil Genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) Edited February 9, 2017 by visionary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Sadly, this will go to SCOTUS a the stay will be overturned. The EO is within the scope of the President's power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 2 minutes ago, Popeman38 said: Sadly, this will go to SCOTUS a the stay will be overturned. The EO is within the scope of the President's power. You don't see it as 4-4 at SCOTUS? Or is the expectation that we will have a full court when it finally gets there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 1 minute ago, Popeman38 said: Sadly, this will go to SCOTUS a the stay will be overturned. The EO is within the scope of the President's power. My question is, if indeed the order is within his power, how can this court have ruled the way they did? Someone here is wrong and I honestly don't get who, legally, that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) Trump's twitter meltdown will be good. Wonder if he does it now or at 5 in the morning. Wow, it was unanimous too! I hope the Supreme Court goes at least 5-3 against Trump. Just to further enrage Trump. Edited February 9, 2017 by Cooked Crack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said: You don't see it as 4-4 at SCOTUS? Or is the expectation that we will have a full court when it finally gets there? Is the assumption that Kennedy will support the EO? I wouldn't be surprised to see a majority against it, if not unanimous stripping of some parts of it. Edited February 9, 2017 by visionary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins59 Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 What's Trump going to do when(not if) we have a terrorist attack? He's going to blame the judges and Americans will agree with him. I see that Trump will ultimately win, unfortunately. Would have been better if immigrants from those countries were banned for a month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 1 minute ago, redskins59 said: What's Trump going to do when(not if) we have a terrorist attack? He's going to blame the judges and Americans will agree with him. I see that Trump will ultimately win, unfortunately. Would have been better if immigrants from those countries were banned for a month. Trump put in a place an illegal insanely confusing order that could not be carried out effectively and caused in some cases irreparable harm to a lot of people including many US residents and citizens and their families and implied this was just part of something larger. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillUnknown Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 all caps, he mad lol 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) Regardless of which side you're on, I don't like the fact a court can interfere with our foreign policy. Its bull****. Trump's gonna go full retard after this decision. Edited February 9, 2017 by jschuck12001 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins59 Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Just now, visionary said: Trump put in a place an illegal insanely confusing order that could not be carried out effectively and caused in some cases irreparable harm to a lot of people including many US residents and citizens and their families and implied this was just part of something larger. I totally agree, but at the same time, Trump now can blame the judges and democrats when we get attacked. The poll that came out yesterday (Quinnipiac is it?) seemed to show that the ban has been his most popular executive order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StillUnknown Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 Just now, jschuck12001 said: Regardless of which side you're on, I don't like the fact a court can interfere with our foreign policy. Its bull****. lets just get rid of all checks and balances 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 9 minutes ago, redskins59 said: What's Trump going to do when(not if) we have a terrorist attack? He's going to blame the judges and Americans will agree with him. I see that Trump will ultimately win, unfortunately. Would have been better if immigrants from those countries were banned for a month. Or we could round them up and put them in detention camps. Amiright? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 2 minutes ago, redskins59 said: I totally agree, but at the same time, Trump now can blame the judges and democrats when we get attacked. The poll that came out yesterday (Quinnipiac is it?) seemed to show that the ban has been his most popular executive order. Nope. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted February 9, 2017 Share Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, StillUnknown said: lets just get rid of all checks and balances Look, the decision may be good for you now but the next time the court decides policy it might not. Edited February 9, 2017 by jschuck12001 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now