You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
Randall Flagg wrote:PaSnow wrote:Secondly, (umpteenthly), do you know what kindof recruiting tool this is? If anything gets foreigners amped up to hate us more its a nimrod like this & Brietbart running the show. San Bernadino, Orlando, Boston, they were just random lone wolfs. Not organized strikes. No different than Dylan Roof, Batman, Virginia Tech, Newtown. Should we ban all Christians from owning guns?
Christian's aren't killing people for their god. Why do I care if the Hajis get riled up over this. They won't be able to enter our country. Trump banned them. What part of this isn't penetrating your skull?
Let them recruit and train for a war for Allah. We'll be better able to kill them by following their behavior and web traffic.
I don't know how to make this any clearer. I don't care if Syrians are killing each other. I'm not going to sacrifice shit to help them. And neither are you. You're not going to do a fucking thing to help them. You'll bitch on the internet, maybe even march downtown on a Saturday after noon when you're not busy. But you don't sacrifice a fucking thing or do anything to inconvenience yourself to help these people you claim to care about. That goes for all of you. You'll sit in your nice western home with the heat on eating a hoagie with extra mayo and talk. None of you have actually done anything to change the world. But you think liking a comment on Twitter or marching in a circle has any fucking impact on reality. It doesn't.
Trump is going to continue to shatter the false barriers that have been built. And most of you will be too busy arguing over what pronoun should be used to call a man who mutilated his body and took estrogen shots. As long as your stomach is full and you have fun things to keep you entertained, you won't sacrifice a fucking thing.
You are more stupid than Kelly Anne Conway & Sarah Palin put together.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/ … index.html
Inside the confusion of the Trump executive order and travel ban
Washington (CNN)When President Donald Trump declared at the Pentagon Friday he was enacting strict new measures to prevent domestic terror attacks, there were few within his government who knew exactly what he meant.
Administration officials weren't immediately sure which countries' citizens would be barred from entering the United States. The Department of Homeland Security was left making a legal analysis on the order after Trump signed it. A Border Patrol agent, confronted with arriving refugees, referred questions only to the President himself, according to court filings.
Trump's immigration order: Which countries are affected?
Iran
Iraq
Syria
Sudan
Libya
Yemen
Somalia
Saturday night, a federal judge granted an emergency stay for citizens of the affected countries who had already arrived in the US and those who are in transit and hold valid visas, ruling they can legally enter the US.
Trump's unilateral moves, which have drawn the ire of human rights groups and prompted protests at US airports, reflect the President's desire to quickly make good on his campaign promises. But they also encapsulate the pitfalls of an administration largely operated by officials with scant federal experience.
More protests against Trump's immigration policies planned
Protesters decry Trump's immigration policies
It wasn't until Friday -- the day Trump signed the order banning travel from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and suspending all refugee admission for 120 days -- that career homeland security staff were allowed to see the final details of the order, a person familiar with the matter said.
The result was widespread confusion across the country on Saturday as airports struggled to adjust to the new directives. In New York, two Iraqi nationals sued the federal government after they were detained at John F. Kennedy International Airport, and 10 others were detained as well.In Philadelphia, a Syrian family of six who had a visa through a family connection in the US was placed on a return flight to Doha, Qatar, and Department of Homeland Security officials said others who were in the air would be detained upon arrival and put back on a plane to their home country.
Asked during a photo opportunity in the Oval Office Saturday afternoon about the rollout, Trump said his government was "totally prepared."
"It's working out very nicely," Trump told reporters. "You see it at the airports. You see it all over. It's working out very nicely and we're going to have a very, very strict ban, and we're going to have extreme vetting, which we should have had in this country for many years."
Trump's immigration ban sends shockwaves
Trump's immigration ban sends shockwaves
The policy team at the White House developed the executive order on refugees and visas, and largely avoided the traditional interagency process that would have allowed the Justice Department and homeland security agencies to provide operational guidance, according to numerous officials who spoke to CNN on Saturday.
Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and Department of Homeland Security leadership saw the final details shortly before the order was finalized, government officials said.
Friday night, DHS arrived at the legal interpretation that the executive order restrictions applying to seven countries -- Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen -- did not apply to people with lawful permanent residence, generally referred to as green card holders.The White House overruled that guidance overnight, according to officials familiar with the rollout. That order came from the President's inner circle, led by Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon. Their decision held that, on a case by case basis, DHS could allow green card holders to enter the US.
There had been some debate whether green card holders should be even allowed to board international flights. It was decided by the Department of Homeland Security they could fly to the US and would be considered on a case-by-case basis after passing a secondary screening.
But the guidance sent to airlines on Friday night, obtained by CNN, said clearly, "lawful permanent residents are not included and may continue to travel to the USA."As of Saturday afternoon, Customs and Border Protection continued to issue the same guidance to airlines as it did Friday, telling airlines that fly to the US that green card holders can board planes to the US but they may get extra scrutiny on arrival, according to an airline official.
Before the President issued the order, the White House did not seek the legal guidance of the Office of Legal Counsel, the Justice Department office that interprets the law for the executive branch, according to a source familiar with the process.
White House officials disputed that Sunday morning, saying that OLC signed off and agency review was performed.
A source said the creation of the executive order did not follow the standard agency review process that's typically overseen by the National Security Council.Separately, a person familiar with the matter said career officials in charge of enforcing the executive order were not fully briefed on the specifics until Friday. The officials were caught off guard by some of the specifics and raised questions about how to handle the new banned passengers on US-bound planes.
Regarding the green card holders and some of the confusion about whether they were impacted, the person familiar with the matter said if career officials had known more about the executive order earlier, some of the confusion could have been avoided and a better plan could be in place.
Administration officials also defended the process Saturday. They said the people who needed to be briefed ahead of time on the plane were briefed and that people at the State Department and DHS who were involved in the process were able to make decisions about who to talk and inform about this.Bannon and Miller were running point on this order and giving directives regarding green cards, according to a Republican close to the White House.
But even after the Friday afternoon announcement, administration officials at the White House took several hours to produce text of the action until several hours after it was signed. Adviser Kellyanne Conway even said at one point it was not going to be released before eventually it did get sent out.
Administration officials also seemed unsure at first who was covered in the action, and a list of impacted countries was only produced later on Friday night, hours after the President signed the document at the Pentagon._________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Go ahead, whine like a little girl that's it's CNN and they're just mad at Trump cause he hires hookers to pee in his bed.
What are trying to demonstrate? I can click links without you having to embed the article.
Trump's order still stands. The only people impacted were the couple hundred on flight or at the airport being detained.
You keep repeating articles that clearly state the stays only impacted a couple hundred people. Did you graduate high school? Is English your first language?
If you're trying to make an argument, please state what it is as I have serious concerns of your ability to understand these articles you've linked.
Go protest outside JFK. It doesn't change anything, but it apparently makes people feel better.
Re: US Politics Thread
No one has ruled this unconstitutional. .
Our courts don't work that quickly, so I'm not sure what your point is.
There are already lawsuits being filed. But many law scholars are saying it is, as well as members from both sides of the aisle (And Mike Pence himself not long ago.)
Re: US Politics Thread
misterID wrote:President Trump has reorganized the National Security Council by elevating his chief strategist Steve Bannon and demoting the Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Now, Bannon will join the NSC's principals committee, the top inter-agency group for discussing national security. The National Security Council is the staff inside the White House that coordinates decision making by the president on such matters, in coordination with outside departments including the State Department and the Pentagon.
It's an unusual decision, NPR's Mara Liasson reported. "David Axelrod, for instance, who had a similar job as Bannon in the Obama administration, never sat in on Principals meetings," she added. When such figures seen as part of the political wing of the White House have participated in broader National Security Council meetings, it's sparked sharp criticism from the national security establishment.
Former White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten said last year that President George W. Bush instructed his top political adviser, Karl Rove, never to appear at a National Security Council meeting.
It wasn't that Bush didn't value Rove's counsel, Bolten said – clearly he did.
"But the president also knew that the signal he wanted to send to the rest of his administration, the signal he wanted to send to the public, and the signal he especially wanted to send to the military, is that 'the decisions I'm making that involve life and death for the people in uniform will not be tainted by any political decisions," Bolten remembered.
Before joining Donald Trump's inner circle during the 2016 campaign, Bannon was the head of Breitbart News, a far-right media outlet that has promoted conspiracy theories and is a platform for the alt-right movement, which espouses white nationalism.
Bannon was extremely influential during the first week of the administration – he is said to be part of a small group inside the White House driving the flurry of executive actions this week, Mara Liasson has reported.
Some of those orders have provoked criticism that Bannon and other administration officials are not coordinating with other agencies on major policy changes, Mara says, such as the chaos and detentions at airports following Trump's executive order on immigration.
The NSC principals committee is defined as "the Cabinet-level senior interagency forum for considering policy issues that affect the national security interests of the United States." It's chaired either by national security advisor Michael Flynn or homeland security advisor Tom Bossert and now includes the secretaries of state, defense and the Treasury, plus the attorney general, White House chief of staff and the president's chief strategist, which is Bannon's position.
On the other hand, the Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will now attend Principals Committees meetings only when "issues pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed," according to the presidential memorandum issued on Saturday.
As NPR national security editor Philip Ewing explains, Trump "is shaking up the wonky process by which the executive branch makes its toughest decisions on national security – the big question is how much that will matter." Here's more:
"On paper, these are big changes: Past administrations ran their National Security Councils with a Great Wall of China-separation between the political team at the White House and the nonpartisan specialists who help with decision-making. The explicit inclusion of Bannon means that Trump's top adviser on messaging, strategy and other partisan issues means he could also be part of decisions about policy toward adversaries, military actions and other such decisions.
"What does it all mean, in practical terms? It's too soon to say. Former national security council staffers say their day-to-day meetings and process were not governed by whatever formal instruction issued by their respective presidents. Political staffers from the White House have attended meetings in the past. The committees invite who they think they need to invite given the topics under discussion – something that will likely continue under [National Security Advisor Michael] Flynn."
Attorney John Bellinger, who served on the National Security Council during the George W. Bush administration, told NPR's Weekend All Things Considered on Sunday that presidents structure the National Security Council in the ways they think work best for them.
"There's no law against the president taking advice from anyone he wants," Bellinger said.
He also said the headlines about the "demotion" of the Joint Chiefs chairman and the director of national intelligence were overblown. Bellinger said time would tell how the council practically operates under Trump and Flynn, but that some of its dealings legitimately might not need to involve those leaders – when leaders meet to plot their strategy for responding to a hurricane, for example.
Top security officials from the Obama administration are blasting the decision.
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who served under Obama and George W. Bush, called the demotions a "big mistake" in an interview with ABC News. " I think that they both bring a perspective and judgment and experience to bear that every president, whether they like it or not, finds useful," Gates said.
Former National Security Advisor Susan Rice called the move "stone cold crazy." In a sarcastic tweet, she said: "Who needs military advice or intel to make policy on ISIL, Syria, Afghanistan, DPRK?"
White House press secretary Sean Spicer responded in an interview with ABC News. "That's clearly inappropriate language from a former ambassador," Spicer said. "We are instilling reforms to make sure that we streamline the process for the president to make decisions on key, important intelligence matters. You've got a leader in General Flynn who understands the intelligence process and the reforms that are needed probably better than anybody else."
Spicer also defended Bannon's qualifications. "Well, he is a former naval officer. He's got a tremendous understanding of the world and the geopolitical landscape that we have now," Spicer said.
Sen. John McCain, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, told CBS News, "I am worried about the National Security Council. Who are the members of it and who are the permanent members? The appointment of Mr. Bannon is something which a radical departure from any National Security Council in history."
McCain added that, "One person who is indispensable would be the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in my view."
NPR
Re: US Politics Thread
What, are you stupid? Bill Clinton could have killed Bin Ladin the previous year and did not. That was a well executed plan and after that time not another one happened. I can't blame Bush on that attack when at that time there wasn't near the threat that we have now. That was the pre 9/11 policy. The previous attack on the WTC was 8 years prior. Bush had been pres for 8 months. That attack was planed way before 8 months. Do we blame Clinton too? There is word they got a vague warning.
Bush was given a memo that said "Terrorists plan on hijacking planes and flying them into buildings" as weapons...and chose to ignore that intel.
Like the Bush admin, Clinton had both domestic and foreign born terror attacks on US soil during his time in office. Under Clinton those who attacked us (first trade center bombing) and Oklahoma city bombing, were both rounded up and put in jail (and executed). On the other hand, Bush went into Iraq to look for WMD and let OBL drift away.
Smoking Guns wrote:I give Obama credit if you give Bush credit for a total of 0 Islamic Terrorist attacks in the US post 9/11-Obama inauguration.
What?? Are you fucking stupid?? Zero AFTER the worst disaster in US History?!? That's the most absurd argument I ever heard?! THAT is what his and Dick Cheney's legacy is. I swear if it occurred when a Democrat was President we'd never have another Democratic President for 50 years. But when it's a Republican all we hear right away is "Obama's gotta get outta there. He's soft!"
Republicans are fucking stupid.
It was only 3000+ in NYC dude...calm down. Besides, it was Clinton's fault, not the terrorists.
Should we ban all Christians from owning guns?
It would be a good start...heh heh
Re: US Politics Thread
Trump's order still stands. The only people impacted were the couple hundred on flight or at the airport being detained.
We have a President, and a Government, who doesn't even know what they're doing!!
http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/m … story.html
A federal judge on Saturday night issued an emergency stay that temporarily allows people who landed in the United States with a valid visa to remain. But by then, Ghassan Assali's two brothers and their families had already been sent home.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
They're sending people home with valid Visa's. It's absurd, you're defending a stance The Trump administration already 180'd on.
even after President Donald Trump eased some restrictions related to his immigration order Sunday.
Reince Priebus, Trump's chief of staff, said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday that green card holders will be allowed into the country "moving forward."
____________________________________________________________________________
They're clowns. All of 'em. It's downright scary they're trying to run a nation.
Re: US Politics Thread
I'll say this: None of us, none of us, not 1, that posts on this board who lean left, expected it to start off this badly.
Forget the first 100 days, it can only go up from here, but the first 10 days are terrible. Purely awful. It's a joke.
They're having meetings behnd closed doors to redirect the ship. Book it.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
I'll say this: None of us, none of us, not 1, that posts on this board who lean left, expected it to start off this badly.
Forget the first 100 days, it can only go up from here, but the first 10 days are terrible. Purely awful. It's a joke.
They're having meetings behnd closed doors to redirect the ship. Book it.
I agree. They will adjust
