Quote (Goomshill @ 23 Dec 2017 16:32)

I mean everyone knows the 9th circuit is always going to create loony rulings and get overturned by scotus on every high profile case, but their legal argument is a real beauty in how ridiculous it is
They hinge their opposition on the idea that the inadmissable aliens clause says that the president may bar immigration "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States", and then the 9th circuit court of appeals since that Trump's determination isn't good enough, and that the 9th circuit is now usurping the right to make national security determinations and decide the policy interests of the united states, as they are of course explicitly forbidden by the precedents the scotus will use as a bludgeon to excoriate the 9th- Kleindienst v. Mandel, Oceanic Navigation Co. v. Stranahan, Gardenas v. United States and Fiallo v. Bell and Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, which state "the power to expel or exclude aliens is a fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the Government's political departments largely immune from judicial control" and "over no conceivable subject is the legislative power of Congress more complete than it is over the admission of aliens"
Not much a sovereign right if the court is allowed to simply state, as the 9th does;



The 9th circuit is neither constitutionally empowered nor plausibly equipped to make national security determinations. They can't take it upon themselves to decide whether this travel ban prevents detrimental immigration or not. To do so is to infringe upon the separation of powers and usurp both congressional and executive prerogative and, as the 9th so loves, make themselves into immortal judge-kings of infinite jurisdiction.


of course its all a silly vain measure because the scotus has already overruled them on the TRO and defanged them until the SCOTUS revisits it, so anything they do between now and then is pointless other than providing the conflicting rulings to bring it back. And since the ban itself is going to obviously pass muster at the supreme court, this is all just one empty circlejerk by the 9th as they roleplay as despots

Quote

Trump praised several companies that have announced employee bonuses in the wake of the bill’s passage, naming AT&T, Boeing, Wells Fargo, Comcast and Sinclair Broadcast Group.

Quote (Voyaging @ Jul 18 2015 06:26am)

I'm seriously so sick of hearing about Trump already; he's a fringer candidate who stands no chance at getting the nomination. He's this year's Ron Paul (gets tons of attention on the internet but loses by a landslide).

Quote (Hugger @ Dec 25 2017 04:42pm)

This post :D

Quote (Leevee @ Dec 25 2017 10:49am)

Sad how it would have been true, but wasn't. America is broken.

Quote (Goomshill @ Dec 25 2017 10:59am)

seriously though, I think more has to be said about how the 9th circuit's ruling is setting a constitutional crisis under the defanging by the SCOTUS
nobody seems to pay it much mind because the ruling has no impact on its own, and some are even saying its trying to give the scotus an 'out' by arguing the determination instead of the equal protection clause
but it would have insane repercussions if taken as stated- it lets the judiciary usurp the decision making process. The law says that the president makes a determination, the 9th circuit says they disagree with his determination and feel he hasn't provided adequate reasoning for it. They could interject into *any* executive power with that same open ended argument. President wants to pardon someone? Thats no longer his call to make, the judiciary has to sign off on it. President wants to stage an international intervention? They don't agree with his reasoning. Etc etc.

There's an acceptable degree of living document judicial constructs I'm comfortable with, but since trump got elected the 9th went full blown unhinged

Quote

Before departing office, Barack Obama ordered US spy agencies to plan operations to combat Russian cyberthreats, according to the The Washington Post. But, more than a year into Trump's tenure, his administration remains reluctant to pursue those counter-measures, claims the report.

In its assessment in January, the US intelligence community said that Putin used a mixture of english-language propaganda outlets (such as RT, formerly known as Russia Today) and social media trolls to influence the 2016 US presidential election. Russia had been honing its efforts since at least 2014, when it annexed Crimea, claims the Post. Around March of that year, Obama aides floated the idea of creating Russian-language channels to provide a counter-narrative to RT, and its ilk.

Another potential plan of action involved using cyberweapons to take down Russia's state-funded online empire and "zap" servers powering fake Russian trolls. US spy agencies even mulled giving Russia a taste of its own medicine by creating fake sites and social media accounts to rebuff the Kremlin's trolls in Europe.

"Those actions were cooked," a former official told the Post. "They had been vetted and agreed to in concept." Ahead, of Trump taking office, a US delegation also reportedly briefed America's NATO allies on their findings.

Despite Russia's misinformation campaign showing no signs of stopping, it seems Trump's administration has been reluctant to implement Obama's road map. The policy talks have been made trickier by the President's stance on the special counsel's investigation into Russia's collusion with his administration, which he described as a "witch hunt."

Quote (duffman316 @ Dec 26 2017 01:35am)

sounds like treason

https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/25/obama-russia-trolls-policy-trump/

Quote (duffman316 @ 26 Dec 2017 07:35)

sounds like treason

https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/25/obama-russia-trolls-policy-trump/

Quote (Black XistenZ @ Dec 26 2017 09:12am)

so, let me get this straight: Trump is following the Obama/Clinton doctrine of "when they (here: the russians) go low, we go high" and somehow, this makes Trump a traitor in your eyes? :unsure: