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.

 

Breaking: Trump travel ban going to Supreme Court!

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigohues
So its this miraculous travel ban that will vanquish terrorism. And not ceasing the taxes being #ing money laundered into proxy wars or daft ass religious zealots who finally realise the irony of ACTUALLY reading said scriptures and think whoa, totally not the message. Or straight up pushing away from the dinner table feast of congetive #ery all together and sipping on some good ol critical #ing thinking skills. Nope. Another false savior to tuck you in safe and sound at night with the burial shroud of moronic isms that's literally the issue in the first #ing place. Because your special. And because NOT everyone has the right to be privy of your special ism. Dude. Chasing tails right off the train's platform smack into the speeding lights that's not stopping at the station. The very same ban lays the brick work to ban you. Then slowly chains us closer to the cell. Amputating your arm over a hangnail is #ing stupid. Yet putting a bandaid over a shotgun wound is equally short sighted.


Geezus...are you related to Dr. Leonard McCoy???

LOL

edit on E30America/ChicagoFri, 02 Jun 2017 07:38:49 -05006amFridaynd07am by EternalShadow because: didn't include original post in reply




posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Attention:



This is NOT the Political Mud Pit forum.

NO political trolling.

NO name calling.

Adjust your behavior while in this forum.

Do not reply to this post.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: tebyen


Trump has been president 132 days. Which means had the travel ban even been in effect, it would have expired 12 days ago.

Where are our better vetting procedures? Why hasn't Trump focused on that? He has access to everything he needed to do so, and yet nothing.


I would also like to know the answer to this question. I think I know. It was never really about getting better vetting procedures. It was always meant to be a permanent ban, they just couldn't say that on the EO.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: tebyen

originally posted by: D8Tee

Is this a National Security issue? Yes; the vetting procedures in place are inadequate, the nations are war torn failed states with no stable government.



The entire point of the traveling ban was that it was a temporary measure because people felt like you; that the vetting process was inadequate. It was supposed to last 120 days so that Trump & Co. could come up with and implement more extensive vetting procedures.

Trump has been president 132 days. Which means had the travel ban even been in effect, it would have expired 12 days ago.

Where are our better vetting procedures? Why hasn't Trump focused on that? He has access to everything he needed to do so, and yet nothing. While you're bitching about the failure of one branch of the government, you're ignoring the other branch entirely.


Thank you! Very well stated!

I'm betting that team Trump can't demonstrate a single action that they've taken to "figure out what the hell is going on,"with our immigration/vetting process, much less any proposed fixes.

Why? Because they never had any intentions whatsoever of reviewing or repairing our immigration/vetting process to begin with.

When team Trump gets in front of the SCOTUS and can't show that they've even lifted a finger to review or fix a problem they said they needed 120 days to fix, their lies will be exposed, again.

They lied about it being an urgent security threat.

They lied about having any intentions of reviewing or fixing our immigration vetting process.

They lied by denying that it's really intended to be the Muslim ban Trump promised during his campaign.

More than likely, it was Trump's plan to just continually extend the ban every 3 or 4 months, indefinitely.

The "Ban" was their fix and they intended to keep it in place for as long as they control the White House.

Good thing we have courts!
edit on 2-6-2017 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:51 AM
link   
This was to be expected, the obstructionist left did this to themselves.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: tebyen

originally posted by: D8Tee

Is this a National Security issue? Yes; the vetting procedures in place are inadequate, the nations are war torn failed states with no stable government.




Where are our better vetting procedures? Why hasn't Trump focused on that? He has access to everything he needed to do so, and yet nothing. While you're bitching about the failure of one branch of the government, you're ignoring the other branch entirely.


I think it's smart to put a halt on things until we can properly formulate procedures. What about those that have already made it through without proper vetting? Should we just keep letting them in while we conduct thorough background checks on those coming in, all the while as we investigate and review those that are already here??? What a mess.

These things don't just happen overnight and this is a very important security issue.
edit on E30America/ChicagoFri, 02 Jun 2017 07:59:31 -05006amFridaynd07am by EternalShadow because: didn't include original post in reply/ I hate my phone/ bad connection



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 08:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: tebyen

originally posted by: D8Tee

Is this a National Security issue? Yes; the vetting procedures in place are inadequate, the nations are war torn failed states with no stable government.



The entire point of the traveling ban was that it was a temporary measure because people felt like you; that the vetting process was inadequate. It was supposed to last 120 days so that Trump & Co. could come up with and implement more extensive vetting procedures.

Trump has been president 132 days. Which means had the travel ban even been in effect, it would have expired 12 days ago.

Where are our better vetting procedures? Why hasn't Trump focused on that? He has access to everything he needed to do so, and yet nothing. While you're bitching about the failure of one branch of the government, you're ignoring the other branch entirely.


Thank you! Very well stated!

I'm betting that team Trump can't demonstrate a single action that they've taken to "figure out what the hell is going on,"with our immigration/vetting process, much less any proposed fixes.

Why? Because they never had any intentions whatsoever of reviewing or repairing our immigration/vetting process to begin with.

When team Trump gets in front of the SCOTUS and can't show that they've even lifted a finger to review or fix a problem they said they needed 120 days to fix, their lies will be exposed, again.

They lied about it being an urgent security threat.

They lied about having any intentions of reviewing or fixing our immigration vetting process.

They lied by denying that it's really intended to be the Muslim ban Trump promised during his campaign.

More than likely, it was Trump's plan to just continually extend the ban every 3 or 4 months, indefinitely.

The "Ban" was their fix and they intended to keep it in place for as long as they control the White House.

Good thing we have courts!


Well thank the common sense of the electoral vote, because if it had been HRC, no action would have been taken at all.

I'm glad it's an issue being discussed and resolved.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: EternalShadow

Negative. Nice tho



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 08:12 AM
link   

edit on 2-6-2017 by odinsway because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 08:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: EternalShadow

These things don't just happen overnight and this is a very important security issue.


Well if this is such an important/urgent security issue, why hasn't Trump done anything to fix it?

That the whole point!

His ban was "supposedly" intended to be temporary while they studied and fixed the vetting process.

Who is in charge of that review?

What have they discovered, proposed and/or accomplished, with respect to addressing this important/urgent security issue?

How much more time do they need?

If the original travel ban had been allowed to go into effect, what course of action would team Trump be proposing at this point in time? An extension? Permanence?

Etc...etc...etc..

I'm confident that for Trump & his minions, the way to fix our vetting process is quite simple.

Just add the sentence;
"All Muslim applicants shall be denied entry."

Now, let's see how the Supreme Court Justices feel about that approach.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 08:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: tebyen

What ? Actually work?
Unless it's grandstanding trump has no interest in working.
And it seems the vetting process in place is pretty adequate. Any terrorist attacks here since 911 have been performed by citizens born and raised here. Not from them entering the country from someplace else.
He really should have employed that superb vetting process in his hiring practices at the whitehouse no?


Help me if you can.

Do I remember something in the news once about some guy who tried to set his shoes on fire in a plane which was coming from outside the U S? or was this from some "alternate reality" than the one shared by ATS ?

And what about the so called "underwear bomber" was he "home grown" ?

I think two kind of trumps the point of "no outsider" theory.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: tebyen

originally posted by: D8Tee

Is this a National Security issue? Yes; the vetting procedures in place are inadequate, the nations are war torn failed states with no stable government.



The entire point of the traveling ban was that it was a temporary measure because people felt like you; that the vetting process was inadequate. It was supposed to last 120 days so that Trump & Co. could come up with and implement more extensive vetting procedures.

Trump has been president 132 days. Which means had the travel ban even been in effect, it would have expired 12 days ago.

Where are our better vetting procedures? Why hasn't Trump focused on that? He has access to everything he needed to do so, and yet nothing. While you're bitching about the failure of one branch of the government, you're ignoring the other branch entirely.


Thank you! Very well stated!

I'm betting that team Trump can't demonstrate a single action that they've taken to "figure out what the hell is going on,"with our immigration/vetting process, much less any proposed fixes.

Why? Because they never had any intentions whatsoever of reviewing or repairing our immigration/vetting process to begin with.

When team Trump gets in front of the SCOTUS and can't show that they've even lifted a finger to review or fix a problem they said they needed 120 days to fix, their lies will be exposed, again.

They lied about it being an urgent security threat.

They lied about having any intentions of reviewing or fixing our immigration vetting process.

They lied by denying that it's really intended to be the Muslim ban Trump promised during his campaign.

More than likely, it was Trump's plan to just continually extend the ban every 3 or 4 months, indefinitely.

The "Ban" was their fix and they intended to keep it in place for as long as they control the White House.

Good thing we have courts!


Well thank the common sense of the electoral vote, because if it had been HRC, no action would have been taken at all.

I'm glad it's an issue being discussed and resolved.


Trump has no desire or intentions to discuss, study, or resolve in any way.

If he did, then he should have no problem showing the court what he's done so far with respect to fixing the vetting process he said was so flawed.

Truth be told, his "fix" is to "ban" and making it appear temporary is just one more of his many, many lies.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   
The best part of the whole issue is:

1. The "Ban" has already worked as intended because they were able to do most of the things already !

So who is the joke really on ?




posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: tebyen


Trump has been president 132 days. Which means had the travel ban even been in effect, it would have expired 12 days ago.

Where are our better vetting procedures? Why hasn't Trump focused on that? He has access to everything he needed to do so, and yet nothing.


I would also like to know the answer to this question. I think I know. It was never really about getting better vetting procedures. It was always meant to be a permanent ban, they just couldn't say that on the EO.


One of the most important elements of the ban was to force the countries in question to improve their data sharing and internal vetting processes. How much effort do you think they put into that knowing that the ban was not being enforced?

If the Supreme Court rule sin Trump's favour then he should restart the ban - and make it permanent until those countries comply.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UKTruth

What do you know of these justices?
What do you know of their records and rulings?
Have you researched what they've done?
They are going to rule for constitutionality. They took an oath.
Not an oath to trump but to uphold and defend the constitution.


And?
If it were that black and white then all ruling would be 9-0.
Like I said, it's 50/50.. much will depend on Gorsuch.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

It needs to be settled in the Supreme Court. One day, some president is going to have to ban travel into our country for immediate security issues, and we can't have some judge with bias and lack of information putting the American people in jeopardy!



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: EternalShadow

These things don't just happen overnight and this is a very important security issue.


Well if this is such an important/urgent security issue, why hasn't Trump done anything to fix it?

That the whole point!

His ban was "supposedly" intended to be temporary while they studied and fixed the vetting process.

Who is in charge of that review?

What have they discovered, proposed and/or accomplished, with respect to addressing this important/urgent security issue?

How much more time do they need?

If the original travel ban had been allowed to go into effect, what course of action would team Trump be proposing at this point in time? An extension? Permanence?

Etc...etc...etc..

I'm confident that for Trump & his minions, the way to fix our vetting process is quite simple.

Just add the sentence;
"All Muslim applicants shall be denied entry."

Now, let's see how the Supreme Court Justices feel about that approach.


The Hawaii injunction prevents President Trump from doing all things related to the EO. That includes restricting travel to the US, conducting studies to determine the effectiveness of of the origin countries screening procedures, and implementing any changes in the vetting procedures of these origin countries.

While I initially believed President Trump should ignore the injunction the same as Hussian Obama ignored the Texas district courts injunction on his dreamer program, it seems President Trump has made all the right moves.

See, most don't know that President Trump insisted that the son in law of one of the 4th circuit judges argue the case for the administration. Thus, this conservative judge had to recuse himself from an already liberal bench. Any chance of the 4th circuit overturning the injunction was lost before the case began.

It seems that President Trump intended for this case to be heard before the Supreme Court. I imagine he is eager to have his arguments heard before a stacked court able to set a federal precedent allowing the presidemt to ban any country's citizens at any time.
edit on 2-6-2017 by BestOf because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

The case really is a watershed on whether or not federal courts can usurp executive powers regards immigration and national security.

As it stands congress did give authority to the President to halt immigration of any group for any reason the executive determined not to be in interest of the nation.

Up to this point minor federal judges have usurped powers granted by Congress to the President without citing any law that was violated by the EO.

That is not only unconstutional but also extra-constitutional in that those powers do not exist for judiciary to act upon.

It's purely political in nature.

My prediction, SCOTUS says not only no, but hell no!
to the minor courts.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

If the Supreme Court rule sin Trump's favour then he should restart the ban - and make it permanent until those countries comply.


Yeah, like I said - it was always meant to be permanent. Trump will never accept whatever those countries submit.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: allsee4eye
This ban is discriminatory to Iranians. Trump hates Iran so much he bans anyone from Iran from entering. There are thousands of Iranians students who study at American universities, paid by the Iranian state, to steal military technology from America to Iran. True, this is unethical, but Iranians never attacked the US, never attacked the west, all they do is self defense from Saudi Arabia and Israel. Banning Iranians from entering would endanger the world because if Iran is attacked and cannot defend itself then the whole world can plunge into chaos. Trump is playing with fire and his stupid ban on Iran should be banned by the Supreme Court.


Defensive only? BS! Iran is the world's largest exporter of terror. I don't normally quote Huff but in this case I'll make an exception.

www.huffingtonpost.com...


I'm going to remember to cite this post each and every time some snowflake gets bent out of shape over "fake news."

Lol, you guys don't give a # about "fake news," until it fits your narrative.

If Huffington Post real, or fake, news?




top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join