Friday, February 3, 2017



Roger Amick said...

US judge temporarily blocks Trump’s travel ban nationwide

FILE - In this Jan. 30, 2017 file photo, Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, right, speaks in Seattle as Gov. Jay Inslee, left, looks on, during a news conference. Ferguson announced that he is suing President Donald Trump over an executive order that suspended immigration from seven countries with majority-Muslim populations and sparked nationwide protests. A hearing is scheduled Friday, Feb. 3, 2017. (Ted S. Warren, File/Associated Press)
By Martha Bellisle | AP February 3 at 7:07 PM

SEATTLE — A U.S. judge on Friday temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s ban on people from seven predominantly Muslim countries after Washington state and Minnesota urged a nationwide hold on the executive order that has launched legal battles across the country.

U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle ruled against government lawyers’ claims that the states did not have the standing to challenge Trump’s order and said they showed their case was likely to succeed.

“The state has met its burden in demonstrating immediate and irreparable injury,” Robart said.

Trump’s order last week sparked protests nationwide and confusion at airports as some travelers were detained. The White House has argued that it will make the country safer.

Washington became the first state to sue, with Attorney General Bob Ferguson saying the order was causing significant harm to residents and effectively mandates discrimination. Minnesota joined the suit this week.

The two states won a temporary restraining order while the court considers the lawsuit, which says key sections of Trump’s order are illegal and unconstitutional. Court challenges have been filed nationwide from states and advocacy groups, with some other hearings also held Friday.

“Washington has a profound interest in protecting its residents from the harms caused by the irrational discrimination embodied in the order,” Ferguson said in a brief.

Federal attorneys had argued that Congress gave the president authority to make decisions on national security and admitting immigrants.

The lawsuit says Trump campaigned on a promise to ban Muslims from coming to the U.S. and kept up that rhetoric while defending the travel ban. Lawyers pointed to dozens of exhibits of speeches and statements Trump has made.

“The executive order effectively mandates that the states engage in discrimination based on national origin and/or religion, thereby rescinding the states’ historic protection of civil rights and religious freedom,” the complaint said, calling it a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Loretta Russo said...

No big deal, Trump can ignore the judge just like Obama.

Precedent, drunkard. Precedent.

Roger Amick said...

No he can't. It is impeachable.

Loretta Russo said...

Yes he can.

Precedent drunkard. Precedent.

Roger Amick said...

Trump's Benghazi

The tribal delegation visiting Sheikh Abdelraouf al-Dhahab was still talking in the very early hours of the morning last Sunday when his nephew, Abdullah, noticed strangers approaching on foot across the rocky, inhospitable terrain of central Yemen.

"Who are you?" Abdullah called out into the night. "Who are you?"

The men shot him dead.

One U.S. Service Member Killed, Several Others Injured During Raid In Yemen
Startled by the gunfire, the Dhahab family scrambled to take up its own weapons and defend its house.

According to accounts by locals, this was the way the battle began with U.S. special operations forces and some of their allies, which would unfold over several hours on the ground — and end with an aerial bombardment.

By dawn, one American sailor was dead and three other service members were injured. Locals say numerous civilians, including women and nine children, were among the Yemenis killed. The U.S. military has opened an investigation, and U.S. military officials tell NPR that civilians were indeed among the victims.

Taken together, claims and counterclaims from the U.S. military and local residents described a chaotic operation, one that drew sharp criticism from Yemeni officials who usually support the U.S. The aftermath of the raid shows the potential dangers if the U.S. military relaxes its current restrictions about using force and protecting civilians, which President Donald Trump has asked the Pentagon to review.

One local man, Sadeq al-Jawfi, was monitoring the battle from his village about 3 miles away, in constant telephone contact with men from his tribe who were visiting the Dhahab family.


Of course, the right wing didn't have a problem with this disaster. A better parallel is The Bay of Pigs. Eisenhower left it on his desk. Kennedy was not well informed about the problems it faced.

But we found out that the President was at a meal with friends and family, when he gave the order to go.

Can you just imagine, if President Hillary Clinton did the same thing. He was not in the situation room. Our esteemed host would be calling for her head on a pike. But that didn't happen, did it. This is another example of ultra partisan politics, and not the coldheartedtruth.

I appreciate that he gives me a place to post. But by maintaining complete control, no alternative views are on the main blog, no contrary views are not allowed. It's his decision, and in some ways I understand why. But sometimes I wish he would step back and look at the bigger picture. I'm not saying that I should be seen here, but I would think it would be a more interesting.

Cue the drunkard spam obsession.

Roger Amick said...

he New York Times, NPR, universities, the “American Jewish Community,” the FBI, the State Department and the CIA.

“The road to the establishment of an Islamic Republic in the United States starts slowly and subtly with the loss of the will to win,” Bannon wrote in the outline. “The road to this unique hell on earth is paved with the best intentions from our major institutions.”

According to the outline, “Great Satan” also planned to explore “the rise of a global holy war” that would “attach and destroy western civilization.”
Report Advertisement

Julia Jones, who’s listed as a co-author on the document, told the Post the draft was the brainchild of Donald Trump’s top advisor.

“It was all [Bannon’s] words,” Jones said.

KD, Saturday what are the Liberals Protesting today??? said...

Trump will US the Obama Rule when it comes to Federal Judges, put them on ignore, do what he wants.

Seems the left did not think it thru when they supported every action done by the Dims when they had power.

We Have these (tools) Rules

Biden rule - no need to nominate a USSC in a President Lame Duck Year, not going forward anyways

Ried rule - with 51 votes you can pass anything out of the US Senate.

Obama Rule - Pen and Phone , nuff said.

HB Rule - Know nothing about everything and say it really loudly

KD said...

The Bay of Pigs = A Raid in Yeman " HB
That is what HyperBolic looks like.

opie said...

KD and company would be screaming bloody murder if any D had done this. He is still harping on 59 states while kellyanne just makes shit up about massacres. Imagine that word took a lot of thought to use and probably was tossed around at a WH meeting. What a crock of crap!!

Eric Trump’s business trip to Uruguay cost taxpayers $97,830 in hotel bills
The Trumps pledged to keep business and government apart, but they will use the publicly funded protection granted to the first family as they travel the globe promoting their brand.

Hope none of the protection get caught with 5 buck hookers......

Let's dump dodd-frank......and let wall street ruin the country again...drain the swamp my ass.

KD said...

Opium can learn, you said it was 56, repeatedly , so I corrected your mistake, it was 59 and Obama said it.

As for the Kelly she said she was wrong.

As for Dodd-Frank please tell us in your own words the best 3 parts of it, thanks.

opie said...

As for the Kelly she said she was wrong.

So. She said it, just like obama said 56 which you never let go. Idiot.

Myballs said...

My issue, and this goes both ways, is how a single judge can set policy across the entire country.

opie said...

, is how a single judge can set policy across the entire country.

Thanx to the framers who set up the system...

Roger Amick said...

WASHINGTON, Feb 4 (Reuters) - The U.S. State Department will allow people with valid visas into the United States, a department official said on Saturday, in order to comply with an opinion from a federal judge in Seattle barring President Donald Trump’s executive action.

“We have reversed the provisional revocation of visas,” the State Department official said in a statement. “Those individuals with visas that were not physically canceled may now travel if the visa is otherwise valid.”

Yesterday the ancient Kansan said Trump would ignore it. Another embarrassment of our country by President Donald Tweeter Trump.

Roger Amick said...

It was 57. Google it.

KD, BOOM said...

I hope for the Democrat party not one person let in by the Judge commits an act of Terror upon an American.

KD, Angel mom Crushed Polesy said...

Do you have the name of the State Dept Official?

Love to look into her/his bio .

rrb said...

I'm not saying that I should be seen here, but I would think it would be a more interesting.

well chump, you've already destroyed one blog. isn't that enough?

you're a typical liberal, and everything a liberal touched turns to shit. so it should come as no surprise that he won't let you fuck this one up too.

Roger Amick said...

In reference to the racist rodent.

"so it should come as no surprise that he won't let you fuck this one up."

It applies to you also.

KD, Dems let everyone in God forbid any of them kill an American said...

Hb has Opium-syndrome

Facts are not their friends, googled it.

"Uh, I’ve now been in fifty … ss-seven? states. I think one left to go. Uh, one left to go — eh, Alaska and Hawaii I was not allowed to go to, even though I really wanted to visit but my staff would not, uh, justify it."

so let me do the math for those on the left that are clearly challenged. 57 states, plus Alaska and Hawaii =59 States.

Settled issue, move on.

rrb said...

It applies to you also.

actually gin blossom, it does not.

i've never expressed a desire to post here, and wouldn't seek the privilege.

when i posted on what is now the gaslight blog, i did so for entertainment and my posts actually drew traffic and yes, even comments.

the fucking nonsense you post is a joke, and your habit of stomping on every one of CH's posts with some lame brained liberal nonsense was boorish, rude, and asshole-ish.

you're a fucking moron and a waste of human flesh. you have no business seeking permission to post here because within days this blog would become a mirror image one the one you already destroyed.

opie said...

Facts are not their friends, googled it.

As predicted, you won't let it go. I would imagine even a dirt farmer would know when the country was bleeding jobs because of busch. So keep up your facade of stupidity, it suits you and your kind well. See rats post above who has less to say then you and loretta combined, but he is an expert at asshattery every time he looks in the mirror.

KD, "Blow up the WHITE HOUSE" said...

Waters said, “I hope he’s not there for four years. I hope that this man and who he is, the way that he has defined himself, the way that he is acting—I am hoping that we are able to reveal all of this. And my greatest desire is to lead him right into impeachment.”

Reminds me of this song.

CA Dreaming

KD, Darn that was fun and easy said...

In 2009 we bleed jobs under Obama, I know that comes as a shocker to those that start in Time in office on March of 2010.

HB is still looking for 20 Million jobs created in the 8 years of Obama.

Obamanomics is historic is so many ways, these are my all time fav's.

50 year low in home ownership

Worst GDP of any modern President

Added 11 million to the electronic welfare rolls

More people then ever in modern history became suddenly Disabled and when on the welfare lines of SSI

Lowered the US Participation Rate faster then any modern President.

94 million Abled Aged American out of the work they want

Loretta Russo said...

Does your daughter still wear tampon earrings?

Loretta Russo said...

"you're a fucking moron and a waste of human flesh. you have no business seeking permission to post here because within days this blog would become a mirror image one the one you already destroyed."

There's something seriously (mentally) wrong with him.

Roger Amick said...

'Outrageous' order
Federal Judge James Robart, a George W. Bush appointee who presides in Seattle, halted the enforcement of Trump's order Friday night, effective nationwide.
Robart, ruling in a lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Washington state and Minnesota who sought to stop the order, said the states "have met their burden of demonstrating that they face immediate and irreparable injury as a result of the signing and implementation of the Executive Order. "
He said the order adversely affects residents in areas of education, employment, education and freedom to travel.

Roger Amick said...

I want to leave the bodies to rot, so it will scare the Beaners who were gonna try and fucking cross the border"



Loretta Russo said...

"I don't use the n word as often as you think."


Married to an African Panamanian.

KD, Debate said...

HB, you ran again.

What was your point of talking about the U- 6, which stands at 9.4 %?

You want to attach that to President Trump?

Loretta Russo said...

HB, you STAGGERED again.


You're welcome.

Roger Amick said...

I just finished an hour and a half hour in the gym. Kiss my ass.

KD, Just split 1 1/2 cords of wood using my TSC 28 ton splitter said...

Good for you.

Now why did you bring up the Issue of the U 6 Report, what was your point we all know Obama finished with a 9.4 Percent Real Unemployment.

KD, said...

Love Trumps Hate involves a lot more assaults and arson then I thought it would


opie said...

Just split 1 1/2 cords of wood using my TSC 28 ton splitter said...

Well good for you. You are putting more particulates into the atmosphere than equivalent amount of coal in a modern power plant and is more harmful to your health. Way to go, idiot.

opie said...

Love Trumps Hate involves a lot more assaults and arson then I thought it would

Facebook and you believe it. WOW!!!!!!

opie said...

Did you notice last month there was a record number employed of 195 M and the labor participation rate went up by .2% . Caught again.

opie said...

Loretta Russo said...
Does your daughter still wear tampon earrings?

Awesome Loretta, Hard to believe a 60 something women like yourself has such juvenile tendencies. Go serve your marine since doing what you are told that is what you do best. LOL!!!!!!

Roger Amick said...

Organizing for Action
Roger --

By now, I'm sure you've heard about the executive order on immigration and refugees that the President signed last Friday. It bans Syrian refugees from entering our country, suspends the entire refugee program for 120 days, cuts in half the number of refugees we can admit, and halts all travel from certain Muslim-majority countries.

I felt I had no choice but to speak out against it in the strongest possible terms.

This is a cruel measure that represents a stark departure from America's core values. We have a proud tradition of sheltering those fleeing violence and persecution, and have always been the world leader in refugee resettlement. As a refugee myself who fled the communist takeover of Czechoslovakia, I personally benefited from this country's generosity and its tradition of openness. This order would end that tradition, and discriminate against those fleeing a brutal civil war in Syria.

There is no data to support the idea that refugees pose a threat. This policy is based on fear, not facts. The refugee vetting process is robust and thorough. It already consists of over 20 steps, ensuring that refugees are vetted more intensively than any other category of traveler.

The process typically takes 18-24 months, and is conducted while they are still overseas. I am concerned that this order's attempts at "extreme vetting" will effectively halt our ability to accept anyone at all. When the administration makes wild claims about Syrian refugees pouring over our borders, they are relying on alternative facts -- or as I like to call it, fiction.

The truth is that America can simultaneously protect the security of our borders and our citizens and maintain our country's long tradition of welcoming those who have nowhere else to turn. These goals are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, they are the obligation of a country built by immigrants.

Refugees should not be viewed as a burden or as potential terrorists. They have already made great contributions to our national life. Syrian refugees are learning English, getting good jobs, buying homes, and starting businesses. In other words, they are doing what other generations of refugees -- including my own -- did. And I have no doubt that, if given the opportunity, they will become an essential part of our American fabric.

By targeting Muslim-majority countries for immigration bans and by expressing a clear preference for refugees who are religious minorities, there's no question this order is biased against Muslims. And when one faith is targeted, it puts us all at risk.

I will never forget sailing into New York Harbor for the first time and seeing the Statue of Liberty when I came here as a child. It proclaims "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." There is no fine print on the Statue of Liberty, and today she is weeping.

This executive order does not reflect American values. If you agree, make your voice heard now.


Madeleine Albright
Former Secretary of State

Roger Amick said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
wphamilton said...

I hate to say it but the Seattle judge overstepped his authority when reasoning that the travel ban was ineffective in the interests of national security. His decision will be shot down and the ban quickly back in place.

Roger Amick said...

wp, other federal judges have said that his ruling is valid.

Roger Amick said...

President Chaos,
We have elected a man who seems to want to be a CEO, instead of the President. The executive orders are coming daily. The owner of a business, can do as he wants. But a President in the United States has limited powers. We are supposed to work with the congress to write the laws, and the President shall enforce the law.

I would not be surprised that he will ignore the courts and do as her wishes. This could actually cause Constitutional crisis. Per the Constitution, the congress is obligated to impeach him.

It's not likely that the Republican congressional leaders will take that step. But if he goes too far, and he's almost there they will do support and defend the constitution.

opie said...

I hate to say it but the Seattle judge overstepped his authority

Maybe trump and the justice department just direct all to ignore the order!!! Just like obama did. That would be fun to watch.

wphamilton said...

Roger it's valid until overturned, which it likely will be.

Roger Amick said...

wp, I don't know if your assumption is likely.
I have used the Google. This is one. I have others.

Executive order

The decree prohibits entry to all refugees, regardless of nationality, for 120 days, and bars Syrian refugees indefinitely. It also suspended the issuance of visas for 90 days to migrants or visitors from seven mainly Muslim countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
Federal court action

Judge James Robart of the federal district court in Seattle ordered the nationwide suspension of the president's order.

His ruling stands until the court can study a complaint filed by the Washington state attorney general, Bob Ferguson. Critics including Ferguson say the measure unfairly targets Muslims.

Federal judges in several other states — notably California and New York — have also ruled against Trump's executive order, but Robart's ruling has by far the greatest sweep.
Travel ban lifted ... for now

"Those individuals with visas that were not physically canceled may now travel if the visa is otherwise valid," a State Department spokesperson said Saturday.

And the Department of Homeland Security, which has authority over border police, said that it was reverting to "standard policy and procedure."

Some airlines began quickly accepting passengers traveling to the United States from the affected countries.

The State Department said that 60,000 visas that had been revoked were again being honored, provided they were not canceled with a physical stamp.
Trump's next move?

The White House has said the Justice Department will challenge the federal judge's ruling, and ask for an emergency stay of that ruling.

If the appeals court were to uphold Robart's ruling, the case could go to the Supreme Court, said Peter Spiro, a law professor at Temple University in Philadelphia.

"It could go very, very fast," he added.

But for now, the Justice Department is operating without a permanent boss: Jeff Sessions, Trump's pick as US attorney general, has yet to be confirmed by the full Senate.
Was the federal ruling unusual?

Not really. The suspension of Trump's order is reminiscent of the reaction to Barack Obama's executive order of November 2014, which sought to protect from deportation more than 4 million undocumented immigrants who had been in the country for at least five years.

A federal judge in Texas ruled that Obama had overstepped his powers and blocked the order's implementation. That decision survived an appeal and reached the Supreme Court. Obama ultimately had to give in on what had been a key measure of his second term.
What lessons can we draw?

Legal experts said Trump's attack on Robart was unusual.

"It's not exactly contempt of court, but it certainly is contemptuous and it conveys a lack of respect for the independent judiciary," said Laurence Tribe, a constitutional scholar and Harvard Law professor.

For Spiro, the Temple law professor, Trump made a mistake by mocking Robart as a "so-called judge."

"That's not something that judges like," he said.

Roger Amick said...

Here’s part of what Robart’s ruling says about Trump’s executive order:

“While preventing terrorist attacks is an important goal, the order does nothing to further that purpose by denying admission to children fleeing Syria’s civil war, to refugees who valiantly assisted the US military in Iraq, or to law abiding tech workers who have lived in Washington for years.”

Amazon is among the Washington state-based companies that threw its support behind attorneys challenging Trump’s immigration order.

Washington Solicitor General Noah Purcell said Friday: “We only challenged the parts that are actually affecting people immediately, which are the parts about refugees and the parts about targeting these seven countries.”

US Customs and Border Protection told airlines it is “back to business as usual” and was reinstating visas following the Washington federal judge’s order, CNN reported.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer responded to the ruling in a statement Friday night: “At the earliest possible time, the Department of Justice intends to file an emergency stay of this order and defend the executive order of the President, which we believe is lawful and appropriate.”

After the ruling, many questions remain. The judge’s order could be challenged in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. It could potentially reach the US Supreme Court.

The Washington judge’s restraining order Friday came down the same day a judge in Massachusetts declined to extend a separate restraining order against Trump’s executive action. The restraining order in that state was due to expire on Sunday.

Earlier this week, another lawsuit filed in Virginia alleged dozens of immigrants trying to enter the US were coerced into giving up visas and green cards amid the travel ban. The State Department and Justice Department said tens of thousands of visas have been revoked as a result of the ban, though the two federal government agencies had diverging numbers.

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the drunkard.

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the drunkard.

Roger Amick said...

On his way home from a conference of Democratic attorneys general in Florida, Mr. Ferguson landed a week ago in the center of a political and legal firestorm. Seattle-Tacoma International Airport was in disarray, with protests massing. Gov. Jay Inslee, a fellow Democrat, had sent word to the attorney general’s staff that he wanted to mount a battering-ram attack on the president’s decree.

Within two days, Mr. Ferguson had become a leading combatant in a battle with the president of the United States, filing a dramatic challenge to Mr. Trump’s travel ban that yielded a ruling from a federal judge on Friday freezing the order’s implementation.

A genial 51-year-old with an earnest demeanor, Mr. Ferguson cuts an unlikely figure as an antagonist for the most pugilistic president in modern times. He is seen in the state less as a chest-thumping showman than as a former member of the King County Council with a wonky sensibility and an eager manner.

But Mr. Ferguson, by his own account and the description of his associates, was incensed and offended by Mr. Trump’s sweeping immigration restrictions. And having landed in Seattle on the first full day the ban was in effect — while demonstrations grew across the country — he went home to greet his family and then went to work devising a plan to cripple Mr. Trump’s new policy.

In an interview, Mr. Ferguson said he had concluded from the start that Mr. Trump’s order was “unlawful and unconstitutional,” and that any appropriate response would have to aim at neutering it entirely. Eschewing the approach of other Democratic-leaning states, which have challenged Mr. Trump’s order by highlighting the claims of individual plaintiffs, Mr. Ferguson and his office opted to draft a complaint arguing that the ban would cause drastic damage to Washington State as a whole.

Mr. Ferguson said that the state solicitor general, Noah Purcell, a former Supreme Court clerk for David H. Souter, had suggested last weekend that the state enlist major private companies as allies. And so the attorney general spoke by telephone with a host of executives, including the corporate counsels of Expedia and Amazon, who agreed to supply forceful declarations for the state’s suit, describing the damage that the White House order could inflict.

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the drunkard.

Roger Amick said...

Reading through these, it's a bit ambiguous, but I think your believe that it's certain is not necessarily going to happen.

Roger Amick said...

The "So called judge' is overstepping what a President should say.

It's as bad as the other call that the judge of Mexican descent, even if he was born and raised in the United States.

His Tweet flurry is simply insane for a President.

Is he mentally ill? Some are beginning to believe it.

cowardly king obama said...


Pass the popcorn please.

Never dreamt it would get this good.

Thank you PRESIDENT Trump.

wphamilton said...

Roger, that copy you refer to with "I have used the Google. This is one. I have others. " says literally nothing at all about the legal validity of the judge's ruling.

Why did you paste it here? Unless you're under the mistaken belief that I'm claiming that he doesn't have the authority to make a ruling? Of course not! It's his legal reasoning to reach that decision that is unsound.

Roger Amick said...

I'm not a lawyer, so I look up the opinions of those who are lawyers, and quite a few agree. the Attorney's General of 11 states say they believe the executive order is unconstitutional. Other judges have said it would stand. I have seen a lot of lawyers on the news programs that don't agree with you.

If you are right, you have the bragging rights. But I don't think it will be supported, in the end, even by the Supreme Court. We should see by next Monday, and it might be on the short list to get to the Supreme Court, as it has been suspended by a Federal judge.

Roger Amick said...


If Matt Drudge had a story about Donald Trump hiring Monica Lewinsky to give him a bl#w job, you would still support him.

opie said...

From Charlie Sykes on why the right is so easy to fool and manipulate. No one here will understand they have been had. LOL

Mr. Trump understands that attacking the media is the reddest of meat for his base, which has been conditioned to reject reporting from news sites outside of the conservative media ecosystem.

For years, as a conservative radio talk show host, I played a role in that conditioning by hammering the mainstream media for its bias and double standards. But the price turned out to be far higher than I imagined. The cumulative effect of the attacks was to delegitimize those outlets and essentially destroy much of the right’s immunity to false information. We thought we were creating a savvier, more skeptical audience. Instead, we opened the door for President Trump, who found an audience that could be easily misled.

opie said...

Western appeals court rejects Trumps emergency order. Now we have 2 courts saying the same thing. Good. My guess, it is a ban and because it fast tracks christians from those countries, it is a religious ban. Oh well.

Commonsense said...

The 9th circuit is notoriously liberal. I considerate it an encouraging sign that they didn't outright dismiss the case.

KD said...

Thank you PRESIDENT Trump." Coward


I really thought by now the LOSERS would have calmed down, went back to their jobs and moved on, but, IF anything they have gotten more wacky, I am loving it.

BATF moves in on Chicago, per Trump's Order.

KD said...

The 9th circuit "

AKA 9th Circus is the single most overturned court in all of American when cases get in front of the Full USSC.

KD, Left More nutz then ever said...

"Trump's Bengazi"

Anyone else here see the pure joy I am having at the Expense of Alky?

opie said...

Commonsense said...
The 9th circuit is notoriously liberal.

Which proves you are a whiner, just like trump and his name calling of a Bush appointed judge. Be proud. Thanx to bush, you now are complaining about his picks. LOL

rrb said...

"Yesterday I asked my most liberal, Trump-hating friend if he ever figured out why Republicans have most of the Governorships, a majority in Congress, the White House, and soon the Supreme Court. He said, “There are no easy answers.”

I submit that there are easy answers. But for many Americans, cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias hide those easy answers behind Hitler hallucinations."

KD said...

Protests Across The Country For Third Straight Weekend... Headline at HuffPO

I want everyone of you leftist to take to the streets, make your cute little voices herd and riot as you have been, destroy property and vent your anger that the Election did not go your way. Throw your sissy hissy fits all you like.

Please, ok pretty please with whip cream and a cherry on top.

KD, Today is National Hug a Liberal Day said...

Good Morning Opie any thing I can help you with today ?

KD, Warren US In Crisis for many years said...

Lizzy Warren talks about herself, the Clinton's, Ried, Obama and other multi-Millionaire Democrats, some one should really tell her, that old tired class warfare message doesn't work when your one of the many Democrat 1 %.

" “We were already in crisis. We were already in crisis because for years and years and years, Washington has worked just great for the rich and the powerful, but far too often, it hasn’t worked for anyone else.”

Opium and HB anything else you need me to "go google it", the two you asked for yesterday gave me such pleasure showing you both up.

wphamilton said...

Opie the appeals court (9th Circuit) did NOT reject the appeal. They declined to dissolve the order without a hearing, as they should, and set a schedule for Monday.

wphamilton said...

This may be a silver lining in Trump's weird cabinet selections: his group may not be capable of drafting executive orders without legal deficiencies that may be attacked.

KD said...


CHT, you have been so good to start a new thread when you get a request.

SO , I am making a request. seems that you can go a lot of good for the Leftist , IF you create a new "Safe Space" tread.

opie said...

wphamilton said...
Opie the appeals court (9th Circuit) did NOT reject the appeal.

Appeals court denies request to immediately restore Trump's travel ban

You say potato, I say potatoe....results are the same. Headline to me was the court rejected what trump wanted. Sorry if that offended you. This will not be a simple process as all have been summoned back to defend their positions. But. the BS name calling of the judge is uncalled for, just as when he dissed Curriel as being biased due to his race.

Roger Amick said...

"An appeals court rejected a request by the Justice Department to immediately restore President Trump's targeted travel ban, deepening a show down, deepening a legal showdown over his authority to tighten the nation's borders in the name of protecting Americans from terrorism."

Note wp, that this appears to be a legal battle over targeting specific ethnic groups. I don't see why you believe that this will, in the end, a rejection of the authority of the Federal judge in Washington. I know the First Amendment rights don't apply to non citizens. But this has affected many American citizens and those here legally. And their rights are being affected by the travel ban.

opie said...

BTW, The US is a group of murderers, just like putin....See O'Reilly interview from yesterday. It is quite shocking to see how little trump knows or cares for the country. Sad, very sad.

rrb said...

Immigration laws have long treated different countries differently. For example, a citizen of France can travel to America without a visa — but not a citizen of Poland. But a Seattle judge has blocked President Trump’s executive order restricting entry from seven violence-wracked or terrorism-supporting countries, suggesting (without explanation) that it violates the Constitution. Judge James Robart’s order has no legal basis, and barely pretends to. It is a bizarre ruling from a bizarre judge.

Judge Robart’s Friday order against Trump sheds little light on his thinking. But at an earlier hearing on Washington State’s motion for a temporary restraining order, he asked what rational basis the government had for restricting entry from the seven countries covered by Trump’s order: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen. As NPR notes, these seven countries were previously singled out by Congress for milder restrictions on visas. Congress did so after terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, in a 2015 law tightening up the Visa Waiver Program that was signed by President Obama. Critics argue that there was no rational basis for restricting travel from these countries but not other countries in the Middle East, such as Saudi Arabia. This argument is silly, since America has deep economic links and security ties with Saudi Arabia that it lacks with the seven countries subject to the 2015 law and Trump’s executive order. America need not antagonize a key ally when it takes steps to increase border security. Perhaps for this reason, Judge Robart’s order in State of Washington v. Trump does not even make this argument, simply suggesting that for some unexplained reason the executive order may violate the “Constitution.”

To cover up the embarrassing weakness of Judge Robart’s temporary restraining order, reporters at the Washington Post and elsewhere have trumpeted the fact that Robart was nominally appointed by President George W. Bush. They have done this to suggest that his ruling must have merit, because otherwise he would not have ruled against a President of the same party as the man who appointed him. But this is misleading, since Robart is a “staunchly liberal” judge whose appointment was “effectively forced on Bush” by liberal Senator Patty Murray in 2004, when Washington State had two liberal Senators.

the judge's actual legal argument is pathetically weak. so it's no wonder that the clown prince of mahogany ridge rushes to embrace it.

trump ultimately wins this one, and prevents the nation from committing suicide by moose-limb.

Roger Amick said...

I strongly recommend that you read the New York Times story I posted in my comments. It's far from as simple as you seem to believe.

rrb said...

huh. it turns out that judge robart's asshattery is legendary:

opie said...

the judge's actual legal argument is pathetically weak.

So says our Ag school drop out.... Hilariously funny......

rrb said...

Blogger Roger Amick said...
I strongly recommend that you read the New York Times story I posted in my comments


all they did was report on a flawed ruling.

there's no actual legal analysis in their story.

Roger Amick said...

The judge opens up our country to potential terrorists and others that do not have our best interests at heart. Bad people are very happy! President Tweeter Trump.

It wasn't immediately clear when a decision could be made on the request for a stay.

Some 60,000 visas that had been canceled were deemed valid after Robart issued his restraining order Friday. Some visa holders rushed to take advantage of the reprieve and enter the U.S.

The Justice Department brief argues that the Seattle judge's order "immediately harms the public by thwarting enforcement of an executive order issued by the President, based on his national security judgment."

Trump's executive order caused chaos at airports, and among those reported detained or turned away included students, professors, and green card holders. Critics have called it a "Muslim ban," which Trump has denied. The president has said the order is necessary to protect Americans from terrorism.

Roger Amick said...

rrb, your sources are patently false and misleading. Extremist groups are not credible.

Try again, with something from a non partisan agenda.

Roger Amick said...

On February 5 1917, 100 years ago to the day, Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1917, which imposed the literacy test on all incoming immigrants and expanded the Chinese exclusion laws to exclude all noncitizens from the "Asiatic Barred Zone." The 1917 law was a precursor to the Immigration Act of 1924, which created the discriminatory national origins quotas system. Congress passed the law with an overwhelming majority, overriding President Woodrow Wilson's veto.

In addition, the 1917 Act added to and consolidated the list of undesirables banned from entering the country t o include "alcoholics", "anarchists", "contract laborers", "criminals and convicts", "epileptics", "feebleminded persons", "idiots", "illiterates", "imbeciles", "insane persons", "paupers", "persons afflicted with contagious disease", "persons being mentally or physically defective", "persons with constitutional psychopathic inferiority", "political radicals", "polygamists", "prostitutes" and "vagrants."

Groups such as the Immigration Restriction League had supported literacy as a prerequisite for immigration for many years. In 1895, Henry Cabot Lodge introduced a bill in the U.S. Senate to impose a literacy test, which would have required prospective immigrants to read five lines from the Constitution. Congress passed the bill but President Grover Cleveland vetoed it. A literacy test was later passed by Congress and vetoed by President Woodrow Wilson.

Anxiety over the fragmentation of American cultural identity, anti-immigrant, and anti-Asian sentiment, led to the Immigration Act of 1917.

Almost immediately after its passage, the Immigration Act of 1917 was challenged by Southwestern businesses. US entry into World War I, a few months after the law's passage, prompted a waiver of the Act's provisions on Mexican agricultural workers. It was soon extended to include Mexicans working in the mining and railroad industries.

Ray Sanchez on CCN conisders looks at the Immigration Act of 1917 and draws paralleles with President Trump's three immigration executive orders.

That law was overturned.

Roger Amick said...

The award was not overturned,my mistake.

Roger Amick said...

For everyone who DID something, small or big, your efforts have been successful. Because of you:
1. Federal hiring freeze is reversed for VA (Veteran Affairs).
2. Court order Partial stay of the immigration ban for those with valid visas.
3. Green card holders can get back in country.
4. Uber pledges $3M and immigration lawyers for its drivers after #DeleteUber trends on Twitter.
5. Obamacare (Affordable Care Act) enrollment ads are still going to air.
6. The ACLU raised 24M over the weekend (normally 3-4Mil/year).
7. HHS, EPA, USDA gag order lifted.
8. EPA climate data no longer scrubbed from website.
9. More people of different career/religious/economic/race backgrounds are considering running for political office than ever before.
10. MOST importantly, since we live in a participatory democracy, the people are engaged.
While more is needed, sometimes you have to celebrate your wins.
Stay vigilant, but also take self care seriously. Activist burnout is a thing. Marathon, don't sprint.
(Feel free to copy and paste to share. If you click "share," it will only appear to our mutual friends.)

It's Super Bowl Sunday. No more politics until the game is over, unless Trump tries to further damage the country.

Voy a hacer un poco de chile con frijoles, pedo como loco y disfrutar de este día con mi encantadora princesa panameña esposa. Este es el discurso de Beaner para jugar con el roedor racista. Buenos Dias amigos e lo roeder racista.

opie said...


all they did was report on a flawed ruling.

So an Ag school flunky might learn something instead of spewing biased rhetoric, which is all you are capable of doing. LOL Just like CH, all GW models are wrong which is a laughable as your flawed ruling statement.

opie said...

When in doubt throw red meat to the likes of CH and rat and declare the media is the reason he is screwing up royally . You guys are jokes. He who lives by the emails. dies by emails as trump should very well know. Those pesky things have a life of their own and are difficult to kill. LOL!!!

Trump Officials Blaming Media for EPA Turmoil, Leaked Emails Show
Tim Sohn,Newsweek 1 h

wphamilton said...

"You say potato, I say potatoe....results are the same. "

No Opie, there is a tangible difference. No appeal was rejected, no decision was made, no arguments nor even a hearing. The ONLY result here was that the 9th Circuit declined to issue an emergency ruling to set aside the lower decision prior to hearing arguments.

Calling this a rejection of appeal, or "the same result" is simply wrong.

opie said...

The trump transition team for the EPA is working under this guideline......"EPA does not use science to guide regulatory policy as much as it uses regulatory policy to steer the science. This is an old problem at EPA. In 1992, a blue-ribbon panel of EPA science advisers that [sic] 'science should not be adjusted to fit policy.' But rather than heed this advice, EPA has greatly increased its science manipulation."

Get down on your knees and pray, we won't be fooled again. Pure Idiocy and rat loves it!

wphamilton said...

rrb said ... all they did was report on a flawed ruling.
there's no actual legal analysis in their story.

I've already tried to explain this point, which is correct. The NY Times had no analysis of the legal reasoning of the ruling, regardless of whether it was flawed.

That your opponents here disregard any mention of the legal reasoning and continue to quote lengthy sections of reporting on the reactions to the ruling, and justifying the judge's (undisputed) authority to rule in the first place, serves to demonstrate that they don't feel at all secure in the legal reasoning in the first place.

The legal defects (of the ruling) mentioned in your link are similar to those I brought up on Friday. The 9th Circuit is capable of literally anything, but even a split Supreme Court will reject flawed legal reasoning.

Roger Amick said...

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) denounced Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday, distancing himself from President Donald Trump’s more equivocal view of the foreign leader.

“Putin is a former KGB agent, he’s a thug, he was not elected in a way that most people would consider a credible election,” McConnell said in an interview on CNN’s “State Of The Union.”

“No, I don’t think there is any equivalency between the way the Russians conduct themselves and the way the United States does.”

Trump had brushed off Fox News host Bill O’Reilly’s characterization of Putin as a “killer” in a recent interview, responding, “We’ve got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country’s so innocent?”

But McConnell didn’t explicitly criticize Trump’s stance.

“I can speak for myself, and I already have about my feelings about Vladimir Putin and the way the Russians operate,” McConnell said. “I’m not going to critique every utterance of the president. I obviously don’t see this issue the same way he does.”

The Senate majority leader also seemed to disagree with the president’s response to the emergency stay that halted the ban on refugees and travelers from seven Muslim-majority nations on Friday. Following the decision, Trump insulted the judge who had temporarily blocked the order on Twitter, blasting “[t]he opinion of this so-called judge.”

Vice President Mike Pence defended the president on Sunday for “speaking his mind” to the American public, but other Republicans registered their disapproval.

“I think it’s best not to single out judges for criticism,” McConnell said. “We all get disappointed from time to time at the outcome in courts on things that we care about, but I think it’s best to avoid criticizing judges individually.”

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) also took issue with Trump’s statement.

“I’ll be honest, I don’t understand language like that,” Sasse said Sunday on ABC. “We don’t have so-called judges, we don’t have so-called senators, we don’t have so-called presidents, we have people from three different branches of government who take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.”

Thank Dems Keep Giving Gifts said...

The GIFT the Liberals have given US is Yuge.

ANY Terrorist Attack in the USA is 100 % sponsored and OWNED by the Dems, again, thanks.

KD, Keep giving Gifts Loser Liberals said...

No Opie, there is a tangible difference. No appeal was rejected, no decision was made, no arguments nor even a hearing. The ONLY result here was that the 9th Circuit declined to issue an emergency ruling to set aside the lower decision prior to hearing arguments.

Calling this a rejection of appeal, or "the same result" is simply wrong."

Opie is willfully stupid.

opie said...

. No appeal was rejected,

You say potato, I say potatoe.......Call it whatever you want, trumps motion or whatever you want to call it, was REJECTED in appeals court. Not sure if you are just looking to bust my ballz or whether your semantic argument changes what happened. Again, your thoughtful discourse is appreciated.

opie said...

Opie is willfully stupid.

Go fuck loretta. Idiot

Roger Amick said...

The "so called Christians" love Trump, despite that he doesn't believe a word of this.

Matthew 5:3-16

3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.

5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

13 ¶Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.

14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.

16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Loretta Russo said...

Spam by the drunkard.

Loretta Russo said...

Stupid gypsy.

C.H. Truth said...

I think there is an easy way to determine if the executive order or ruling is technically legally correct...

The constitution and the statutory law provides the President with discretion to call for travel bans. Many travel bans or partial bans have gone into place for a variety of reasons, including some after 9-11 and one in 2011 (our two previous Presidents for security reasons) and many others over the years for things like bans on areas where there has been contagious outbreaks of deadly disease.

In all cases, it was fundamentally unfair to those who were not a national security concern or sick with a contagious disease. But those bans were never declared "unconstitutional" because of the fact that they negatively impacted certain people.

So I guess the question is what is fundamentally different about this particular travel ban? If (and it certainly appears to be the case in my view) this is a case of a Justice imposing his own discretion over that of the President in terms of whether or not the ban is necessary or "just" - then that Justice is by all means overstepping their boundaries. They are not ever supposed to just impose their own policy views over those who are elected and those the constitution provides the authority to.

So I would ask Roger or Opie... what is different about this particular policy other than it's Trump and you don't agree with it?

Btw... I have spent some time reading some actual "legal" blogs and I am pretty much ignoring anything written by the main stream media. These are people who are more interested in being legally correct than politically correct.

The word I have seen used multiple times to describe this Judge's decision has been "conclusary" which is to say it's "consisting of or relating to a conclusion or assertion for which no supporting evidence is offered". They are m ore convinced by the Boston Judge who rejected the request for a "stay" of the order and stated that the ultimate chances of success was not very good.

That being said, most are less than optimistic that the 9th court of appeals will overturn it, given their history of offering very liberal legal views that so many times end up overturned at the USSC level.

Look for the Trump team to stall any appeal to the USSC until they can assure that Gorsuch is on the court. Most of the legal experts believe that the conservative block (including Roberts) will rule that it is the President's (not the court's) authority to make a determination as to whether such a ban is good policy.

wphamilton said...

CH sad, The word I have seen used multiple times to describe this Judge's decision has been "conclusary" which is to say it's "consisting of or relating to a conclusion or assertion for which no supporting evidence is offered".

Exactly, and it's not even conclusory in the regular sense of a conclusion that is properly before the court for the judge to decide. The judge decided, in conclusory fashion, that there was no national security interest significant enough for the travel ban. He doesn't get to make that call - his reasoning there is not only without support, but potentially fails on Constitutional grounds.

That doesn't always stop the Ninth Circuit so they might uphold, but it's just a short delay at most.

caliphate4vr said...

Do You Know Someone Suffering From Trump Unacceptance & Resistance Disorder (TURD)?

Know the signs, spot the symptoms, and save a life.

TURD is a pattern of pathologically dissociative and psychotic behavior, first observed in the late hours of November 8th 2016, and increasing in severity with passing time.

Sufferers of TURD often exhibit pronounced cognitive dissonance, sudden bouts of rage, rioting, uncontrollable crying and “unfriending” on Facebook.

TURD is caused by the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States of America.
For many, both in America and worldwide, this was a shocking and unexpected outcome; their preferred news sources having failed to inform them that the alternative candidate was a criminal, Socialist parasite in such ill health she got chucked into the back of a van like a kidnap victim.

Research is ongoing, but TURD appears to correlate closely with the following environmental and behavioral factors:

Membership in the Democratic Party
Identifies as an Actor or Artist
Exposure to a Liberal Arts college professor
Works for the Federal, State or Local government
Living in a densely populated metropolitan area
Massive student debt
Spotty or non-existent work history

Patients with TURD are very resistant to treatment, and dangerous in large groups. Any possibility of treatment requires that they be separated from their hive-mind support apparatus; they cannot begin the process of accepting reality in the presence of encouragement towards delusion and irrationality. Separation may require the assistance of law enforcement.

If you have a friend or loved one suffering from TURD, urge them to seek treatment.
Together we can beat this scourge, and Make America Great Again.


opie said...

Anonymous caliphate4vr said...
Do You Know Someone Suffering F

One of the funniest things you have ever plagerizied, pauline. BTW....Go falcons, beat the cheaters. LOL!!!

opie said...

So I would ask Roger or Opie...

As you, I,m not qualified to proffer an opinion on the legality. I'm letting those who know describe the remedies. I do know that there is a religious determination in the order preferring christians and believe that will ultimately be the demise of the order. Smarter minds than you and wp are making that case. Have fun with your mental masturbation. LOL

opie said...

Loretta Russo said...
Spam by the drunkard.
February 5, 2017 at 11:53 AM
Blogger Loretta Russo said...
Stupid gypsy.

Rhetorical question CH, why do you let this tripe go without comment??? You afraid of her lile you are of rat, the other worthless opiionator who never has a fact. BTW. You can certainly agree with the judge that there have been no actual terrorists that have carried an action out in the US from any of those countries. As a conclusory statement, the judge is correct.

opie said...

I also imagine that CH is just fine with the degrading comments donnie made about that busch appointed judge. Probably think that makes him a big man with such learned name calling....LOLOLOL!! He should apologize to the judge, just like he did to curiel.

C.H. Truth said...

I do know that there is a religious determination in the order preferring christians and believe that will ultimately be the demise of the order.

Escaping religious persecution is one of the criterias made when someone is asking for asylum. So by nature, our refugee laws not only broadly allow for, but specifically deem religious considerations to be allowed.

C.H. Truth said...

I also imagine that CH is just fine with the degrading comments donnie made about that busch appointed judge.

You should inform yourself, Opie... prior to the Reid rule that eliminated the filibuster for federal judges, it was common that Presidents and Congress would make deals.

Murray Works to Confirm Washington Judge James Robart Feb 11 2004 (Washington, D.C.)

Today U.S. Senator Patty Murray worked to confirm James “Jim” Robart to be a U.S. District Court Judge for the Western District of Washington State. Murray worked with Senator Cantwell and White House to nominate Mr. Robart, and today Murray introduced him before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Read more at:

Unless you are not aware that Murray was a Democrat, you would understand that Robart (who had never been a judge) was not a "conservative" when he was nominated and confirmed. Unless you are unaware of his history, you would understand that he has been considered liberal to the point of almost being "wacky" in some of his rulings. This sort of ruling seems to fit the bill here.

C.H. Truth said...

If you haven't figured this out by now... these lawsuits were all very specifically brought in district courts that are known to have mostly liberal judges. So far there hasn't been a single Judge who would be considered "conservative" who has ruled on this. Seattle, Boston, etc...

Even the Boston judge who ruled in favor of the Administration and the order was not considered conservative.

With the exception of the Seattle Judge, the other decisions were basically specific to people who were being held in Airports. There was no sweeping decisions "other" than those that stopped people with existing permanent resident status from basically being deported, which is a position that the Administration has reversed.

Out of all the judges who have ruled, none of them (except Robart) has extended their decision above and beyond specific people within their districts who were specifically effected.

opie said...

C.H. Truth said...
If you haven't figured this out by now... these lawsuits were all very specifically brought in district courts that are known to have mostly liberal judges.

And what does that prove other than you don't like the outcome????? I guess the founding fathers should have been more astute to your needs and set up the judicial branch more to your liking.

Even the Boston judge who ruled in favor of the Administration

Apples and tennis sneakers, CH.

opie said...

You should inform yourself, Opie...

Instead of an insanely stupid pedantic duck, answer the question I asked about trumps name calling. BTW, who appointed the judge, CH? Idiotic tripe about Murray don't mean shit.

Roger Amick said...


A federal appeals court on Sunday ruled that President Trump’s controversial immigration order will remain suspended for the time being, allowing those previously banned from coming to the United States at least another day to get here.

The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit preserves a lower judge’s order to temporarily halt the ban — and based on a schedule the court outlined, the stop will remain in place at least until sometime on Monday. The Justice Department said it would not elevate the dispute to the Supreme Court before that.

Trump responded to the development Sunday by writing on Twitter that he had “instructed Homeland Security to check people coming into our country VERY CAREFULLY.” A Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman did not immediately return messages seeking comment on how, practically, that screening would be implemented.

“Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril,” Trump wrote. “If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!”

The next few days will be telling for the future of the president’s executive order. The appeals court asked those challenging the ban to file written arguments by 4 a.m. Eastern on Monday and asked Justice Department lawyers to reply by 6 p.m. Eastern. They could then schedule a hearing or rule whether the ban should remain on hold.

opie said...

CH, your proof of Robart being a demo is nothing but an opinion piece. Keep making stuff up, it is what you now do best, like donnie of NY. LOLBTW..... Blame busch for such a crappy choice in your mind. Your editorial comment about being wacky is priceless and an opionio. The bar gave him 100% approval and he was confirmed unanimously which is fact, unlike your fable.

C.H. Truth said...

And what does that prove other than you don't like the outcome?

I didn't have any issues with the first several rulings. I believe that the order went too far (I am still speculating it was on purpose) in terms of permanent residents. That order was not extended by a second judge for the reasons that it was no longer an emergency, and the Administration reversed the position on permanent green card residents.

I do (as most legal experts from the sites I frequent) take issue with the Seattle ruling that stated that the entire travel portion was "unnecessary" and therefore unconstitutional... and extended his ruling outside of his jurisdiction (by most all accounts).

The fact of the matter is that Robart was recommended by Patty Murray as part of a deal between Senate Democrats and President Bush. Robart was never a judge. This is all part of historical fact. It can be looked up with a simple google search.

The argument (apparently your argument) that he was technically appointed by Bush and therefore he's a conservative is nothing more than your assumption, not backed by any evidence what-so-ever.

wphamilton said...

Roger, from you article quote, " and based on a schedule the court outlined, the stop will remain in place at least until sometime on Monday." is the only thing that relates to our discussion, and it confirms what I told you.

KD, Resist WE Much said...

CHT, Correct

WP - Exactly.

It is simple to understand and will be cleared up at some point .

I don't like that the courts got involved, but, With Unlimited Money flowing in from Hillary/Sorros/ DNC/UCLA this is how it is going to be for 8 years of Trump.

It would have been nice IF the LEFT would have given this President 100 days and his Nominees.

But "Resist we MUCH"

opie said...

C.H. Truth said...
And what does that prove other than you don't like the outcome?

Still ducking the name calling trump has made to the judge and whether you think that is appropriate??? Concentrate CH on the question rather than avoiding at all costs and changing the subject. Wonder of gorsuch will mention that BS in his confirmation hearings like the good little pube he seems to be.

KD, U-6 Unemployment at 9.4 % @ Obama Exit said...

Still ducking the name calling trump has made to the judge and whether you think that is appropriate?" Madam Opium

Nope, he should not have called the so called Judge a so called Judge.

What I want is for the left not just here, but everywhere to continue to do what they have done since around 1:30 AM Nov. 9th, 2016.

C.H. Truth said...

Still ducking the name calling trump has made to the judge and whether you think that is appropriate???

I believe that over the top name calling is inappropriate across the board. I am sure you are equally outraged at the variety of names our President has been called, as you are regarding this "so called" Justice business.

opie said...

as you are regarding this "so called" Justice business.

Finally an answer!!! Outraged to what he was called.....BULLSHIT TO YOU. You allowed the racist name calling about Obama go on here unimpeded. If you had a shred of decency, you would have curbed that years ago, and did not. Now you complain what trump is being called.....BFD, he's an alleged big boy, deal with. Again, your comment is absurd and your hypocrisy is unbound, but you knew that. LOL

C.H. Truth said...

Opie - you are talking to someone who has:

1) Has his face photo-shopped as the head of a dildo, and saw the picture fly around a variety of sites.
2) Had my web host server shut down multiple time by bots attacking my site.
3) Had Ronald Reagan Jr completely misrepresent my writings on national cable news.

Being called a "name" is not something I really have much interest in addressing. My skin is a bit thicker than that. So the "best" you will get me to say is that name calling is inappropriate.

But to suggest that I should share the "outrage" of the left every time someone they worship gets called a name is downright silly. Moreover, to suggest that somehow a Federal Judge should be given certain considerations that other prominent people are not given, is simply hypocrisy. I have heard jurists such as Scalia and Thomas called every name in the book, and I don't demand that anyone else give a hoot, much less express some sort of "outrage".

The hypocrisy is yours, Opie... embrace it!

opie said...

) Has his face photo-shopped as the head of a dildo, and saw the picture fly around a variety of sites.

Been accused of being a muslim, born overseas and is not a legitimate president. That is the most obscene group of lies, all embraced by the dildo you embrace. You are pulling a loretta, they did it too as your only argument, which is not only immature, but indicative to your complete bias. And good for you, visiting sites that are deplorable, you get what you want to see and prove what, that there are more idiots like rat on both sides. Again, you live with your hypocrisy and lets see what the court decides. Won't it be a hoot if it is fast tracked to the SCOTUS with 8 judges, thanx to your side being obstinate and blaming d's for the problem. More fake headlines.

But to suggest that I should share the "outrage"

Yep all those people marching on the street are all about name calling. Your dumbest comment to date. CONGRATS!!!!! LOL