It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hypocrisy Proven Democrats can block immigration but Republicans its illegal

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Seattle judge blocks Trump immigration order


SEATTLE/BOSTON (Reuters) - A federal judge in Seattle on Friday put a nationwide block on U.S. President Donald Trump's week-old executive order temporarily barring refugees and nationals from seven countries from entering the United States.


Well i guess the Federal Judge will have blood on his hands then. I hope his conscious can handle it.


Judge James Robart, a George W. Bush appointee, made his ruling effective immediately on Friday, suggesting that travel restrictions could be lifted straight away. He is expected to issue a full written ruling over the weekend.


That explains it. A Bush nominee. Trump defeated Bush.


Washington Governor Jay Inslee celebrated the decision as a victory for the state, adding: "no person - not even the president - is above the law."



So it's okay when Obama, FDR, Carter,and Clinton to suspend immigration and or put American citizens in Concentration Camps. But when Republicans do it's unconstitutional. Even though no one in there right mind would travel to any of the countries on Trump's ban list.


The state's attorney general, Bob Ferguson, said: "This decision shuts down the executive order right now." He said he expected the federal government to honor the ruling.


Enjoy the blood on your hands.


Washington's case was based on claims that the state had suffered harm from the ban, for example students and faculty at state-funded universities being stranded overseas.


Funny how you didn't have a problem with Jimmy. How many students were shipped back to Iran?


Robart said no attacks had been carried out on U.S. soil by individuals from the seven countries affected by the travel ban since that assault. For Trump’s order to be constitutional, Robart said, it had to be “based in fact, as opposed to fiction.”


So why did Obama suspend immigration from iraq then? i'll be waiting for an answer.


The State Department said on Friday that fewer than 60,000 visas previously issued to citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen had been invalidated as a result of the order. That disclosure followed media reports that government lawyers were citing a figure of 100,000.


Somalia doesn't even have a Government. And now these people can come through unchallenged.
edit on 3-2-2017 by Stevemagegod because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Judicial activism.

Don't you just LOVE it ?

I don't get why Trump haters are defending people from those seven countries.

All of them are terrorist hot spots.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Judicial activism.

Don't you just LOVE it ?

I don't get why Trump haters are defending people from those seven countries.

All of them are terrorist hot spots.



At this point I honestly believe they are fighting Trumps EO just because they don't like Trump. Even though deep down everyone in the country knows that these places are Hell Holes that no one in there right sane mind would ever visit.
edit on 3-2-2017 by Stevemagegod because: spelling



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
So a restraining order stops the EO.

Guess what.

The existing laws do not guarantee any visas be issued at all to anybody.

Watch what happens next.



Trump may have done it again. Trigger the Triggerables.

While they fight this in court, the Embassies will just limit visas anyway.




posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Stevemagegod

One good part of the case is, they are citing harm to big corporations in Washington State.

Microsoft, Expedia, and some others are actually mentioned in the court filing.

Ironic.




posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Stevemagegod




At this point I honestly believe they are fighting Trumps EO just because they don't like Trump.


And they really don't care how many of us die in the process.

ISIS has got to be foaming at the mouth. Thanking them for making it EASY to get here.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Stevemagegod

One good part of the case is, they are citing harm to big corporations in Washington State.

Microsoft, Expedia, and some others are actually mentioned in the court filing.

Ironic.



I know right. Plus since when does Microsoft employ Muslims from those regions? Did they run out of cheap Indian labor or something?



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Stevemagegod

Democrats never blocked immigration. There was a temporary 6 month ban on Iraqi refugees during the Obama administration and this was because of the revelation from two Iraqi refugees who revealed they attached US soldiers back in Iraq. It wasn't a full blown ban on immigration from that country or a number of other countries.

Stop with the lies.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen


The existing laws do not guarantee any visas be issued at all to anybody.


Many of the individuals turned around were already issued with Visas to enter the United States.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
This is going to be reversed.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

Doesnt need to be reversed. It doesnt change anything. Visa's are issued by the state department. The state department on orders of the president can revoke, or decline ANY visa for ANY reason. All that needs to happen is they revoke the visa's from those countries. When people go to board the plan, the airline will decline their boarding as the automated system will decline the boarding. They can't arrive to the USA at all without pre-authorization to enter.

So this judge's reversal simply means ok, now anyone can enter, sure but first you need a visa, and until you get it approved, its a mute point.

Camain



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: xuenchen


The existing laws do not guarantee any visas be issued at all to anybody.


Many of the individuals turned around were already issued with Visas to enter the United States.



Old news.

I'm talking about if and when the EO gets struck down, and what trump might do in the interim.

Do you happen to know if a Judge can order visas be issued?




posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

No, he can't, that usurps the power of the executive branch. The law is actually on Trumps side. Given, he is a man-child, and a rude, egotistical, arrogant, self righteous %%&#*$. HOWEVER, he is in the right on this. He just went about it in a bad way is all.

Camain



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Stevemagegod




posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:09 PM
link   
News Flash ........

Turns out the restraining order is only partial to specific sections.


WA-Order


original EO:
EXECUTIVE ORDER: PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES

Sections 3c, 5a, 5b, 5c, 5e are restrained.




posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 10:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: xuenchen


The existing laws do not guarantee any visas be issued at all to anybody.


Many of the individuals turned around were already issued with Visas to enter the United States.



Old news.

I'm talking about if and when the EO gets struck down, and what trump might do in the interim.

Do you happen to know if a Judge can order visas be issued?



If the visas were improperly revoked I assume a Judge could order them reissued.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 11:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Stevemagegod

The way I see it, seems that liberal logic is fairly easily understood. It would appear that they only have to do one thing to get their way.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Stevemagegod


The state's attorney general, Bob Ferguson, said: "This decision shuts down the executive order right now." He said he expected the federal government to honor the ruling.

Enjoy the blood on your hands.


There is already extreme vetting for immigrants from these countries. And there exists extreme vetting for refugees from the area as well. Donald Trump's executive order even affected those who already had green cards and visas. There are no incidents where a refugee from one of the countries in Trump's ban has killed on U.S. soil. There is no evidence there will be blood on the judge's hands.



posted on Feb, 3 2017 @ 11:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Stevemagegod

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Stevemagegod

One good part of the case is, they are citing harm to big corporations in Washington State.

Microsoft, Expedia, and some others are actually mentioned in the court filing.

Ironic.



I know right. Plus since when does Microsoft employ Muslims from those regions? Did they run out of cheap Indian labor or something?


I was reading an article in the paper the other day that talked about how the tech industry honestly does employ people from those regions. In addition, Trump is trying to reduce the number of people allowed to come work in the U.S. from overseas. This parallel policy also affects the tech industry, who are short 400,000-800,000 jobs and get over 80,000 employees from other countries.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Stevemagegod

Democrats never blocked immigration. There was a temporary 6 month ban on Iraqi refugees during the Obama administration and this was because of the revelation from two Iraqi refugees who revealed they attached US soldiers back in Iraq. It wasn't a full blown ban on immigration from that country or a number of other countries.

Stop with the lies.


Go pick up a History Book.




top topics



 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join