The President Of The USA: Donald Trump

Forums › Politics › The President Of The USA: Donald Trump

1 | ... | 263 | 264 | 265 | 266 | 267 | 268 | 269 | 270 | 271 | 272 | 273 | 274 | 275 | 276 | 277 | 278 | 279 | 280 | 281 | 282 | 283 | ... | 1118

10326 posts

Uber Geek

#1713745 1-Feb-2017 10:14

Bannon (Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda) needs to control his idiots:

The official word from Spicer is now that the (travel) "ban" isn't a "ban" despite the fact that the POTUS, Kellyanne Conway, as well as Spicer himself have been calling it (on record) - a "ban".

"Extreme vetting" is also not an "extreme" vetting programme, apparently. From the WH :“Calling for tougher vetting for individuals traveling from seven dangerous places is not extreme”. Oh wait - the POTUS called it "extreme vetting" days ago.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
67443 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1713746 1-Feb-2017 10:15

Diplomats complained about the Executive Order through a lawful channel. White House seems to either ignore or don't know about the law and how these diplomats are protected.

These links are referral codes

Dynamike

158 posts

Master Geek

#1713770 1-Feb-2017 10:35

sbiddle:

I didn't say Obama did the same thing. I said those countries were selected by the Obama administration and restrictions put in place. They were not selected simply because of Trump's business interests which is something the media are trying to pitch.

This^^

The seven countries were selected by Homeland Security in January 2016. They identified Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen as countries of particular concern per the Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs-announces-further-travel-restrictions-visa-waiver-program

Which is why the Executive Order states "to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f)". The only country specifically mentioned in the Executive order was Syria.

Fred99

10326 posts

Uber Geek

#1713785 1-Feb-2017 10:49

freitasm:

Diplomats complained about the Executive Order through a lawful channel. White House seems to either ignore or don't know about the law and how these diplomats are protected.

I don't expect the WH to respond (with anything substantive);

Spicer's comment to "get with the program or (they should) go" is subject to interpretation - it's not demanding that dissenting views can't be expressed through that channel under threat of dismissal unless you interpret "getting with the program" as meaning "being fully supportive of" rather than following orders/instructions and "doing your job".

The letter probably serves as official document with which to hang the Trump administration later - if and when they do what many expect.

I wonder what kind of person we'll get as new ambassador. I don't have high hopes that our central position in TPPA negotiations, stance on trade, nuclear issues, and our vote on the recent UN resolution re settlements in Palestine bodes well for an appointment of a person who'll have much sympathy at all for NZ's values.

Fred99

10326 posts

Uber Geek

#1713796 1-Feb-2017 10:58

Dynamike:

sbiddle:

I didn't say Obama did the same thing. I said those countries were selected by the Obama administration and restrictions put in place. They were not selected simply because of Trump's business interests which is something the media are trying to pitch.

This^^

The seven countries were selected by Homeland Security in January 2016. They identified Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen as countries of particular concern per the Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs-announces-further-travel-restrictions-visa-waiver-program

Which is why the Executive Order states "to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f)". The only country specifically mentioned in the Executive order was Syria.

Whatever. Nothing "new" would have come up as reason for Trump to bring in the ban with such extreme consequences and disruption - circumstantially proven by the fact that he was campaigning on a "muslim ban" for years anyway - when he had no access to classified security information, and during a long period where there haven't been any attacks from nationals from those countries on US soil (but there have been by nationals from other muslim majority countries which are not on the list).

gsr

111 posts

Master Geek

#1713812 1-Feb-2017 11:09

Fred99:

freitasm:

Diplomats complained about the Executive Order through a lawful channel. White House seems to either ignore or don't know about the law and how these diplomats are protected.

I don't expect the WH to respond (with anything substantive);

Spicer's comment to "get with the program or (they should) go" is subject to interpretation - it's not demanding that dissenting views can't be expressed through that channel under threat of dismissal unless you interpret "getting with the program" as meaning "being fully supportive of" rather than following orders/instructions and "doing your job".

The letter probably serves as official document with which to hang the Trump administration later - if and when they do what many expect.

I wonder what kind of person we'll get as new ambassador. I don't have high hopes that our central position in TPPA negotiations, stance on trade, nuclear issues, and our vote on the recent UN resolution re settlements in Palestine bodes well for an appointment of a person who'll have much sympathy at all for NZ's values.

I watched Nikki Haley's questioning by Rand Paul on youtube yesterday. It sounds like they are going to withhold their UN dues until the resolution is reversed. So, yeah I don't think they care about our values.

Fred99

10326 posts

Uber Geek

#1713817 1-Feb-2017 11:17

gsr:

I watched Nikki Haley's questioning by Rand Paul on youtube yesterday. It sounds like they are going to withhold their UN dues until the resolution is reversed. So, yeah I don't think they care about our values.

Pretty sure that they care about our values - but reject them.

Sorry - for nitpicking - but I think perhaps you may have meant that they don't care for our values.

Stan

929 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1713819 1-Feb-2017 11:19

Sideface:

vexxxboy:

<snip>

... that is the biggest problem with Trump, he always twists the truth and facts with everything he does. no wonder the media brought up the fact that he has business interest in those countries, he is his own worse enemy.

Who created the list was it trump or Obama?

Stan

929 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1713831 1-Feb-2017 11:29

The thing that really annoys me over this refugee ban is that no one on here gave a **** over the Obama administration creating the refugee crisis in the first place.

Where was the righteous indignation in 2011 when the Obama administration toppled the Libyan government, first by sending in the CIA to back rebel groups (that ended up having direct ties to Al-Qaeda) and then using airstrikes to finish the job? Prior to this intervention Libya had one of the highest standards of living of any country in Africa (according to the UN). They even had free healthcare.Today the country is a failed state, plagued by ongoing violence. That's why these people are trying to escape.

And where was this righteous indignation in 2012 when the U.S. began providing weapons, money and training to rebel groups in Syria in an attempt to overthrow Assad? Even at the time it was known that most of these weapons were ending up in the hands of jihadists, and it was no secret that these groups were committing horrific atrocities. Again why do you think these people are trying to escape?

Then there was Yemen, where the Obama administration quietly supported Saudi Arabia's bombing campaign for over a year, before finally getting their hands dirty and launching direct airstrikes in 2016.

You know it seems to me that the inhabitants of these countries would have preferred that you stand up against the wars that destroyed their homeland before and while it was happening, rather than take issue to where they are allowed to go in the aftermath.

Rikkitic

Devastation by stupidity
12247 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1713842 1-Feb-2017 11:38

I think the USA has a terrible record of sticking its nose where it shouldn't, and not sticking it where it should. Personally, I have enough righteous indignation for all of these issues but if I had to pick a recent starting point, I guess I would choose Bush's ridiculous oil-grabbing WMD crusade against Sadam.

I don't think there is ever a bad time to talk about how absurd war is, how old men make decisions and young people die. - George Clooney

Stan

929 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1713848 1-Feb-2017 11:50

Rikkitic:

I think the USA has a terrible record of sticking its nose where it shouldn't, and not sticking it where it should. Personally, I have enough righteous indignation for all of these issues but if I had to pick a recent starting point, I guess I would choose Bush's ridiculous oil-grabbing WMD crusade against Sadam.

I really hope trump sticks to what he said before he was elected

Fred99

10326 posts

Uber Geek

#1713865 1-Feb-2017 12:22

Stan:

Rikkitic:

I think the USA has a terrible record of sticking its nose where it shouldn't, and not sticking it where it should. Personally, I have enough righteous indignation for all of these issues but if I had to pick a recent starting point, I guess I would choose Bush's ridiculous oil-grabbing WMD crusade against Sadam.

I really hope trump sticks to what he said before he was elected

While he's said nice words like that about "not intervening" , he's simultaneously been issuing orders to build a border wall with Mexico and to force them to pay for it, suggested "we might get another chance" to take Iraqi oil, to insist on and help Sth Korea become a (directly) nuclear armed state, threaten China that he'll block access to Sth China Sea Islands, threatened to withhold UN funding unless a sanction already passed is reversed etc...

Blatant serial liars can sometimes tell the truth - but your link doesn't provide an example.

MikeAqua

5733 posts

Uber Geek

#1713868 1-Feb-2017 12:30

It's three ringed circus.

The irony is that the left in the US handed Trump the presidency on a plate.

They forgot that to implement policy in government you first have to win an election, and to do that you need your core voters.

Mike

DarthKermit

5270 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1713876 1-Feb-2017 12:38

Wanting Mexico to pay for the Great Wall of Trump is about as crazy as wanting Iraq to pay for a war they never asked the USA to start!

I'm sure we all remember George Bush and his bitch Tony Blair and all the lies they told to start that crusade of theirs.

Fred99

10326 posts

Uber Geek

#1713879 1-Feb-2017 12:42

MikeAqua:

It's three ringed circus.

The irony is that the left in the US handed Trump the presidency on a plate.

They forgot that to implement policy in government you first have to win an election, and to do that you need your core voters.

I don't think they "forgot" that at all. They severely misread the mood and selected the wrong candidate (IMO), but couldn't have been expected to predict that there would be a well coordinated program of interference from (probably) Russia.

1 | ... | 263 | 264 | 265 | 266 | 267 | 268 | 269 | 270 | 271 | 272 | 273 | 274 | 275 | 276 | 277 | 278 | 279 | 280 | 281 | 282 | 283 | ... | 1118