The president first has an obligation not to do shitty illegal things. At least that's what conservatives tell me when Dems are in power...

pretty much sums it up.. but evidently some people believe that 2 + 2 = 7




uhh yeah, Donald Trump did.. or at least that is what he told everyone.. that if we did not enforce the travel ban immediately we would all suffer the consequences. We've now passed the 90 period that the travel ban would have been enforced, and just like the 40+ years prior, no one from any of the listed countries committed a terrorist attack in the US. Anyone who wouldn't have been coming into the country during that 90 period would be coming in now.. so basically we would have jeopardized our mission in Iraq for absolutely nothing

This post was edited by TCassa89 on May 8 2017 06:30pm

What a fool, he needs to invest in some dinosaur repellent nunchucks, you're welcome btw

I don't get it..

If the travel ban stopped something from happening (you wouldn't know), you say it didn't work.

If the travel ban caused a terrorist attack or some shit, you'd also say it didn't work.

No matter what, you're just a hater who will bash every Trump move, just like there were people who bashed every Obama move.

Good night.

I was about to debate your argument until i saw you are trusted tag, well put these guys are all sheep

But that's what the judges are for. The president does stuff, and it's up to the judges to decide if it's legal or not. If it isn't they block it and that's it, but a president should try to pass the laws he promises.

See, when Dems do that the Republicans throw a shit fit about dictatorships and other nonsense. They're strangely silent about Trump though....

I disagree with you though, his first responsibility is to uphold the constitution and stay in good faith with that oath.

Well I'm not saying the republicans are any better or worse than the dems, hypocrisy is something I very much dislike, but it doesn't really change if something is right or wrong.

And while I do agree that the president should uphold the constitution, the constitution has some room for interpretation. If Trump truly believed that what he proposed wasn't contrary to the constitution, then he had the right to try. It wasn't crystal clear, I remember there being much of debate around it.

This isn't a hypothetical, we know for a fact there were no terrorist attacks from the listed countries within the 90 day period that the travel ban would have been in place. We also know that this travel ban was not coordinated or advised by national security experts, but was coordinated by a commission put together by Rudy Giuliani as a workaround to implementing something that resembled Trump's original campaign proposal of a Muslim ban. If anything it is the people who are defending the travel ban who are forming an opinion driven by zeal alone, and nothing else. The information speaks for itself, the travel ban was meaningless

This post was edited by TCassa89 on May 8 2017 08:57pm

Not sure what world you're living in, but Glenn Beck won't STFU.



There could be sleepers.

This post was edited by thundercock on May 8 2017 09:01pm