Yes. I was really just being sarcastic. Apparently some people are unable to see how this Muslim ban is a violation of core American values. Thankfully these values are part of our law. My ignorance is fought with respect to the large subset of Americans who do not believe some fairly basic American values apply to everyone. It leaves me disheartened, and I reply to this feeling with sarcasm.
Rule of law is an American value. At least it was before Trump.
A dog is an animal, but that doesn’t make every animal a dog.
I’ll throw some more…
The State Department said that the attorney’s higher number likely included exempt visa holders like “diplomatic and other visas that were actually exempted by the travel ban.”
Trumpistan – make your own numbers.
???
The people affected by the ban are neither non-documented nor US citizens, so what exactly are you purporting to fix?
Those of us who can think straight realize that it you thought that a pre-announcement would cause a rush on valid visa/passport-bearing terrorists hurrying to infiltrate us within a week, a “very smart” president might set himself up quite a duck hunt to easily catch them.
Quoting the OP, because I can 
It so painfully and obviously breaches the US Constitution, as the Attorney General knew before being fired for upholding the Rule of Law.
And the fucking President - the President of the USA - tweets this in response:
The judge didn’t do anything except apply the Constitution of the country.
This is utterly ridiculous.
The TRS is not a ruling on the constitutionality of the travel ban. It’s a temporary halt in order to determine if any laws or the constitution are violated by the ban. This is far from over.
It’s utterly Trump. And still there’s a large segment of the population who will eat it up. In Il Douche’s own words…Sad!
Unless you prefer to use the US constitution for toilet paper, it’s over.
The Attorney General was right, the federal judge is right, and trump is a legal simpleton - either that or he’s showboating for his audience.
The federal judge has not made a ruling, so saying he’s “right” shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the process.
It’s interesting to me that this is almost exactly the way the White House described the initial travel ban when they rolled it out: a temporary measure while we take a step back to evaluate what we’re doing.
My understanding is that the law was reviewed by staff, to see if it met the technical requirements, the "I"s were crossed, the "T"s dotted. It wasn’t their concern whether or not the law could be defended against Constitutional complaint, their opinion was not solicited.
When they passed it to her, it became her question: can I reasonably defend this from a foreseeable Constitutional complaint? Not “Can I prevail” nor “Should I prevail” but can I make a reasonable case? It is her opinion that she cannot and she refuses to try.
Dunno, seems a bit technical to me, a legalistic way to say this sucks, and I’m not gonna.
for historical reference -
(post shortened, underline added)
for historical reference -
(post shortened)
for historical reference -
(post shortened)
Johnny Ace provided clarification, which is just as good as a correction.
The fact that the LSM chose to make Conway’s misstatement the top “news” story of the day, instead of asking for a simple clarification/correction, shows the inherent bias of the anti-Trump-administration-looney-tune-left-leaning-alleged-reporters-pundits-and-internet-haters.
Except for Chelsea Clinton, of course. She and her mom were very lucky that they survived that non-existent gunfire when they landed in Bosnia. :rolleyes: As I remember, Hillary claimed she misspoke.
It does not require “bias” to be anti-Trump. Only intelligence and compassion. And love of Country.
And I thought you earlier agreed that “LSM” was an ignorant way to express your love of all things Limbaugh and you would stop doing it?
*Congress “vests complete discretion” in the president to impose conditions on entry of foreigners to the United States, and that power is “largely immune from judicial control,” according to the court filing.
“We don’t appoint judges to our district courts to conduct foreign policy or to make decisions about the national security,” Pence said.
Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, predicted the appeals court would not have the last word. “I have no doubt that it will go to the Supreme Court, and probably some judgments will be made whether this president has exceed his authority or not,” she said.
In his ruling, Robart said it was not the court’s job to “create policy or judge the wisdom of any particular policy promoted by the other two branches,” but to make sure that an action taken by the government “comports with our country’s laws.”*
http://dr.wral.com/16505288.html
This so-called “so-called judge”, U.S. District Judge James Robart has not ruled that Trump’s executive order is right, wrong, or even constitutional. The right honorable judge has agreed to hold the case over for trial/appeal where it’s merits can be argued.
Just between you and me, I don’t listen to Limbaugh. The only Limbaugh stories I hear come from 3rd party sources.
Where’d you learn that stupid LSM shit then? I can’t imagine you thought it up yourself.
The first time I heard it was from Sarah Palin – maybe her?
Seriously? That’s what you deem a victory? Over what you thought was a misspelling?
Nevermind Conway lying through her ass.
I know, you wouldn’t be able to live with yourself if you had to admit that you elected a misanthropist power-fiend and a bunch of really poor liars into office.
So what is LSM anyway? Liberal Sports Media? Lying Seminary Media?