The Truth Behind Trump

[suncowiam]

People are ticked off over President Trump closing the borders, and turning Muslim immigrants away. The problem is that most people are not fully understanding why he is doing it. Allow me to shed some light on the subject.

The greatest threat to the USA's national security is ISIS. Radical Islamic Terrorist attacks. That is what President Trump is trying to prevent here. He does not want another 9-11. He does not want a bombing like Brussels, on US soil. He does not want a coordinated attack like Paris, in an American city.

Like it or not, the USA is at war. We are allied with Israel, and so long as that alliance stands, Israel's enemies become our enemies. The USA is seen as the Watchdog, and part of the world resents us for it. The USA has to be ever vigilant, standing guard day and night.

The seven countries of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Iran, Somalia, Yemen and Sudan, are the ones that are banned. ISIS is strongest in those countries, and as a counter measure, President Trump has locked down immigration from those countries, TEMPORARILY. He said it during the campaign; he wants better measures in place for screening people originating in Muslim countries, as Radical Islamic Terrorists are a threat to the sanctity of our country. The ban is not permanent. Most Muslims are not terrorists, and he understands that, but how do you separate them just by looks alone? You can't.

President Trump's duties are to the American citizens first, not foreigners. What he is doing is in the interest of protecting us on the home front. We can't allow one terrorist to successfully carry out their plans on US soil. If some immigrants get inconvenienced in the meantime, then so be it. Such is the price for freedom and democracy.

If President Trump did not close the borders, and a terrorist attack was successful in the US, then people would be screaming about "why didn't the government see it coming? Why didn't they take measures to prevent it?" Welcome to preemptive prevention. He will take the heat up front, secure our borders for the time being, and in doing so try to protect American families from the horrors of ISIS.

If you can't understand that, then you're not seeing the bigger picture.

Go figure. Even judges think like normal folks and ask common sense questions regarding the ban. Some one who claims to be seeing the bigger picture might need to check their glasses.

Judges hammer attorneys on both sides of travel ban case

And of course, an easy Google search answers all of it which @Laika has already done.

But if we want to build defenses based on generalizations and fear, lets also round up all our potential white terrorists and place them in internment camps. Who knows when the next white terrorist will attack, right? Perfect logic.

 

[suncowiam]

* Update *

Trump rips appeals court and says even ‘a bad student in high school’ would support his travel ban

So, Trump says a bad high school student would have the logic to support the ban. Uhm, he's right. A good high school student moving on to higher learning would not support the ban. LOL

Trump has a pissy fit again, trying not to declare a US court politically biased. He needs his nap time.

 

[suncowiam]

* Update *

Federal appeals court refuses to reinstate Trump travel ban

Those politically biased judges are up to no good again, by refusing to reinstate the travel ban.

 

[idav]

* Update *

Federal appeals court refuses to reinstate Trump travel ban

Good for them, unanimous even.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

People are ticked off over President Trump closing the borders, and turning Muslim immigrants away. The problem is that most people are not fully understanding why he is doing it. Allow me to shed some light on the subject.

The greatest threat to the USA's national security is ISIS. Radical Islamic Terrorist attacks. That is what President Trump is trying to prevent here. He does not want another 9-11. He does not want a bombing like Brussels, on US soil. He does not want a coordinated attack like Paris, in an American city.

Like it or not, the USA is at war. We are allied with Israel, and so long as that alliance stands, Israel's enemies become our enemies. The USA is seen as the Watchdog, and part of the world resents us for it. The USA has to be ever vigilant, standing guard day and night.

The seven countries of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Iran, Somalia, Yemen and Sudan, are the ones that are banned. ISIS is strongest in those countries, and as a counter measure, President Trump has locked down immigration from those countries, TEMPORARILY. He said it during the campaign; he wants better measures in place for screening people originating in Muslim countries, as Radical Islamic Terrorists are a threat to the sanctity of our country. The ban is not permanent. Most Muslims are not terrorists, and he understands that, but how do you separate them just by looks alone? You can't.

President Trump's duties are to the American citizens first, not foreigners. What he is doing is in the interest of protecting us on the home front. We can't allow one terrorist to successfully carry out their plans on US soil. If some immigrants get inconvenienced in the meantime, then so be it. Such is the price for freedom and democracy.

If President Trump did not close the borders, and a terrorist attack was successful in the US, then people would be screaming about "why didn't the government see it coming? Why didn't they take measures to prevent it?" Welcome to preemptive prevention. He will take the heat up front, secure our borders for the time being, and in doing so try to protect American families from the horrors of ISIS.

If you can't understand that, then you're not seeing the bigger picture.

Ya know, I really don't like the last line of your OP.
I keep hearing how the left likes to shut down discussion, but...yeah...

 

[esmith]

* Update *

Federal appeals court refuses to reinstate Trump travel ban

Those politically biased judges are up to no good again, by refusing to reinstate the travel ban.

Good for them, unanimous even.

Question there @idav. How can these judges make a determination on security issues, are they privy to the intelligence that the President is? The purpose of this EO was to take a look at who we let into this country and what measure are taken to determine if they are sufficient. Is it just remotely possible that President Trump received a security briefing that indicated that the countries affected by this EO had a high security risk? No, you and everyone else that had a issue with this EO is basing your objections on social reasons only.

Where were all you when the Obama cancelled the Cuban refugee policy. Oh that's right it was the Obama and in all of your eyes he could do no wrong. Sheeesh

 

[jonathan180iq]

Go figure. Even judges think like normal folks and ask common sense questions regarding the ban. Some one who claims to be seeing the bigger picture might need to check their glasses.

Judges hammer attorneys on both sides of travel ban case

And of course, an easy Google search answers all of it which @Laika has already done.

But if we want to build defenses based on generalizations and fear, lets also round up all our potential white terrorists and place them in internment camps. Who knows when the next white terrorist will attack, right? Perfect logic.

Even a bad high school student could get this right...

 

[idav]

Question there @idav. How can these judges make a determination on security issues, are they privy to the intelligence that the President is? The purpose of this EO was to take a look at who we let into this country and what measure are taken to determine if they are sufficient. Is it just remotely possible that President Trump received a security briefing that indicated that the countries affected by this EO had a high security risk? No, you and everyone else that had a issue with this EO is basing your objections on social reasons only.

Where were all you when the Obama cancelled the Cuban refugee policy. Oh that's right it was the Obama and in all of your eyes he could do no wrong. Sheeesh

The way I see it, Trump really took the thing to extremes, there are plenty of ways to get stufff like that passed the Judges. When the judge he appointed is like "whoah" there is something amiss.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

It was the statistic I got from the page. It sounds wrong doesn't it?

the statistic below may be more accurate (and more interesting as they go state by state):

Buckle Up: All 50 States, Ranked by How Likely You Are to Die in a Car Accident

The highest one is Montana with a 1 in 4,433 chance of dying in a car crash. (So still a long way off from 1 in 20.)

"The highest one is Montana with a 1 in 4,433 chance of dying in a car crash. (So still a long way off from 1 in 20.)"

Hey, we Montanans blame the federal government for that one, as the rate of car crashes went up when they forced us to adopt federal speed limits.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

Statistics don't account for acts of terrorism in the future.

Or for the ones in your imagination.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

People are ticked off over President Trump closing the borders, and turning Muslim immigrants away. The problem is that most people are not fully understanding why he is doing it. Allow me to shed some light on the subject.

The greatest threat to the USA's national security is ISIS. Radical Islamic Terrorist attacks. That is what President Trump is trying to prevent here. He does not want another 9-11. He does not want a bombing like Brussels, on US soil. He does not want a coordinated attack like Paris, in an American city.

Like it or not, the USA is at war. We are allied with Israel, and so long as that alliance stands, Israel's enemies become our enemies. The USA is seen as the Watchdog, and part of the world resents us for it. The USA has to be ever vigilant, standing guard day and night.

The seven countries of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Iran, Somalia, Yemen and Sudan, are the ones that are banned. ISIS is strongest in those countries, and as a counter measure, President Trump has locked down immigration from those countries, TEMPORARILY. He said it during the campaign; he wants better measures in place for screening people originating in Muslim countries, as Radical Islamic Terrorists are a threat to the sanctity of our country. The ban is not permanent. Most Muslims are not terrorists, and he understands that, but how do you separate them just by looks alone? You can't.

President Trump's duties are to the American citizens first, not foreigners. What he is doing is in the interest of protecting us on the home front. We can't allow one terrorist to successfully carry out their plans on US soil. If some immigrants get inconvenienced in the meantime, then so be it. Such is the price for freedom and democracy.

If President Trump did not close the borders, and a terrorist attack was successful in the US, then people would be screaming about "why didn't the government see it coming? Why didn't they take measures to prevent it?" Welcome to preemptive prevention. He will take the heat up front, secure our borders for the time being, and in doing so try to protect American families from the horrors of ISIS.

If you can't understand that, then you're not seeing the bigger picture.

"The problem is that most people are not fully understanding why he is doing it."

Not even Donald Trump fully understands why he is doing it.

To arrive at that decision, the appeals court did something close to what fact-checkers, journalists, scholars and others do every day when Trump and his surrogates make extraordinary claims: It demanded extraordinary evidence — or at least some evidence — for the administration’s arguments.

And it got none, the judges said.

The court asked the government to explain the “urgent need” for the order to be restored, but Justice Department lawyers offered “no evidence,” the opinion read.

It asked for evidence in the form of legal precedents that noncitizens affected by the order “have no rights” under the Constitution. The court found the government’s examples unconvincing.

It also asked for evidence that immigrants from the countries named in Trump’s order had committed terrorist attacks in the United States. Instead, the government merely argued that the court “must not review its decision at all,” according to the opinion.

Travel ban ruling: In court as on Twitter, Trump confronts evidence gap

Trump has no clue what he is doing on this travel tan. It is obvious to anyone with a clue that this EO was rushed and poorly planned.

"The greatest threat to the USA's national security is ISIS. Radical Islamic Terrorist attacks. That is what President Trump is trying to prevent here. He does not want another 9-11. He does not want a bombing like Brussels, on US soil. He does not want a coordinated attack like Paris, in an American city."

The greatest threat to the USA is their own paranoia as US citizens continued to surrender their rights to the government out of fear. All politicians have to do is say 9-11 and people lose all sense.

"If you can't understand that, then you're not seeing the bigger picture."

They are using fear and hate to control people; that is how Trump got elected. And if you can't understand that, then you are not seeing the bigger picture.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The greatest threat to the USA's national security is ISIS.

Hardly. We face a much greater threat from factory farming, high fructose corn syrup, and transfats. We have far more to fear from our fellow Americans than any ISIS member.

Like it or not, the USA is at war.

No, we aren't.

The seven countries of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Iran, Somalia, Yemen and Sudan, are the ones that are banned. ISIS is strongest in those countries,

And yet that doesn't include funding, training, and propaganda hot spots like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and the list doesn't include Afghanistan, another very problematic country with radical Islmam.

President Trump's duties are to the American citizens first, not foreigners.

Then he needs to wake the **** up and realize all he's doing in priming people for radicalization. At most, we have a "war of ideas," and you do not win these wars by excluding and saying you're not welcome. It's won by supporting and promoting liberal and moderate Muslims, empowering them to become the face of Islam, and working with them to defeat radical Islam. We will not achieve this if we don't even allow the liberal and moderate Muslims in and leave them stranded in lands where their ideas are silenced, often under penalty of death.

If you can't understand that, then you're not seeing the bigger picture.

You are the one who isn't seeing the bigger picture. We can't and won't make ourselves more safe or secure by surrendering rights and freedoms in the name of fear, nor by telling people from certain nations they can't come in the usual legal ways. All that's going to do is keep doctors, professors, college students, and those tired hungry masses yearning to breath free away from our shores while ISIS continues to pool from marginalized Muslims already here (who are often be American-born citizens).

 

[metis]

All that's going to do is keep doctors, professors, college students, and those tired hungry masses yearning to breath free away from our shores while ISIS continues to pool from marginalized Muslims already here (who are often be American-born citizens).

And this is what some simply do not understand, namely that Trump's EO, matched with his words, comes off as being extremely anti-Muslim, which has already been used for more recruiting for militant groups like ISIS.

But even probably more important than that, we need cooperation from Muslims in order to fight and defend ourselves and others from these militant groups.

 

[suncowiam]

Question there @idav. How can these judges make a determination on security issues, are they privy to the intelligence that the President is? The purpose of this EO was to take a look at who we let into this country and what measure are taken to determine if they are sufficient. Is it just remotely possible that President Trump received a security briefing that indicated that the countries affected by this EO had a high security risk? No, you and everyone else that had a issue with this EO is basing your objections on social reasons only.

Where were all you when the Obama cancelled the Cuban refugee policy. Oh that's right it was the Obama and in all of your eyes he could do no wrong. Sheeesh

Well, it would definitely help to know all the information available. We can't assume there's an imminent danger, which you are doing, btw.

The Cuban immigration issue has been discussed earlier in this thread. Obama normalized immigration in that case.

Here's the thing with US legal matters. Once a ruling is done, there is precedence set. Also, a judge could have done the same thing like the Washington judge to overturn Obama's action. The difference between then and now, is that it did not go to court. The best assumption for me is that the court did not feel it had legal grounds to overturn Obama. Where as today, it is becoming more clear that the court has legal ground to overturn Trump.

Are you suggesting, like Trump, that court is politically bias? Well, where were the conservative judges during the Obama administration?

Or how about we stop assuming courts do not behave politically and that they are actually working as they were sworn in, which is to uphold the law. The laws can be interpreted and I have to assume each judge, whether they're conservative or liberal, are doing their best to uphold these laws.

 

[suncowiam]

Even a bad high school student could get this right...

So these judges are worse than bad high school students?

I'm going to have faith that these judges know the law better than bad high school students or Trump.

 

[jonathan180iq]

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/02/09/17-35105.pdf

I mean, Hell. Just read it for yourselves...

The Department of Justice could offer no explanation or support. That's all there is to it. Personal opinions are really pretty pointless if the lawyers for the DOJ can't even come up with a decent argument, don't you think?

Trump's boisterous buffoonery is great for political theater - but President's are held to a bit of a higher standard. The requirements for making good arguments in the White House aren't the same as roasting Kristen Stewart on Twitter...

 

[jonathan180iq]

So these judges are worse than bad high school students?

I'm going to have faith that these judges know the law better than bad high school students or Trump.

No. I'm making fun of the moronic arguments that Trump has been using to support himself and his EO.

When the defense team for the DOJ can't make decent arguments to defend this thing, why is anyone else even trying?

 

[esmith]

Well, it would definitely help to know all the information available. We can't assume there's an imminent danger, which you are doing, btw.

I am not making any claim that there is imminent danger. IF you read what I said "Is it just remotely possible that President Trump received a security briefing that indicated that the countries affected by this EO had a high security risk?" Do you see any claim that we are in imminent danger?
[/QUOTE]

The best way to fix this is for President Trump issue a new executive order that does the same thing but carves out exception for those that currently have green cards or visas. That can not be challenged in court. Well it could, but has no legal standing.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That can not be challenged in court.

That is perhaps the greatest way to undermine the Constitution. The courts can challenge things for a reason. It's a fail-safe to prevent any one other branch from exerting too much power. In this case, the Courts are functioning exactly as intended.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The best way to fix this is for President Trump issue a new executive order that does the same thing but carves out exception for those that currently have green cards or visas.

Or, we don't do that, continue the "extreme vetting" Obama had in place, and not make more enemies by doing things that are ignoring facts and reality anyways, and focus on the facts that our greatest potential threats are likely already here and not on their way here.