Trump passes executive order restricting immigration, in violation of the Constitution.

[The Romulan Republic]

To everyone trusting in the military and law enforcements commitment to defend and uphold the Constitution

People who do so are fucking fools, espepcially when it comes to the US military and police.

I don't delude myself about the fact that their are many soldiers who would simply do what they're told. I just think Ralin went too far when he asserted the entire US military and law enforcement establishment was eager to act as Trump's enforcers.

You'd best hope their are soldiers who are loyal to the Constitution over Trump, because if you're right and I'm wrong, then their is absolutely nothing to stop Trump declaring himself dictator other than his largely hypothetical sense of personal restraint. Not even armed resistance would be likely to make a difference in that scenario, because the US military will always have more firepower.

[The Romulan Republic]

To everyone trusting in the military and law enforcements commitment to defend and uphold the Constitution: The Department of Homeland Security declared they will continue deportations.

Department Of Homeland Security Response To Recent Litigation
Release Date: January 29, 2017
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

WASHINGTON – The Department of Homeland Security will continue to enforce all of President Trump’s Executive Orders in a manner that ensures the safety and security of the American people. President Trump’s Executive Orders remain in place—prohibited travel will remain prohibited, and the U.S. government retains its right to revoke visas at any time if required for national security or public safety. President Trump’s Executive Order affects a minor portion of international travelers, and is a first step towards reestablishing control over America's borders and national security.

Approximately 80 million international travelers enter the United States every year. Yesterday, less than one percent of the more than 325,000 international air travelers who arrive every day were inconvenienced while enhanced security measures were implemented. These individuals went through enhanced security screenings and are being processed for entry to the United States, consistent with our immigration laws and judicial orders.

The Department of Homeland Security will faithfully execute the immigration laws, and we will treat all of those we encounter humanely and with professionalism. No foreign national in a foreign land, without ties to the United States, has any unfettered right to demand entry into the United States or to demand immigration benefits in the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security will comply with judicial orders; faithfully enforce our immigration laws, and implement President Trump’s Executive Orders to ensure that those entering the United States do not pose a threat to our country or the American people.

This is in direct response to a federal court ordering a temporary halt to deportations. Continuing to enforce Trump's Executives Orders means flat out disobeying the courts, and they are still doing it.

I was tempted to say that the constitutional crisis is here, but technically I guess that will be when Trump publicly orders them to disregard the courts.

Because the leadership of the Department of Homeland Security=all of US law enforcement and military forces.

You do realize that their are many, many people in the armed forces and intelligence community, including some of very high rank, who have openly expressed their opposition to Trump's policies?

Besides, this decision, disgusting as it is, is still a far cry short of the hypothetical we were discussing, where troops are ordered to act as Trump's enforcers against the American people/courts.

[The Romulan Republic]

In any case, the Homeland Security statement is contradictory. On the one hand, they say they will enforce Trump's Executive Orders, and on the other, that they will follow judicial orders. I've seen people interpreting this statement as both defiance of and compliance with the courts.

Edit: This may well be deliberate obfuscation- Trump has a history of making contradictory and outlandish statements, in part, I believe, to obscure his real agenda.

Of course, one cannot rule out simple incompetence.

[MKSheppard]

took me some time to find this. Apologies if someone has done this before me.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/ ... -refugees/

The revelant section of trump's EO (see the full quote at the bottom of this post) appears to be:

I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

Looking around it appears to be this section

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1187

(12) Not present in Iraq, Syria, or any other country or area of concern
(A) In general Except as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C)—
(i) the alien has not been present, at any time on or after March 1, 2011—
(I) in Iraq or Syria;
(II) in a country that is designated by the Secretary of State under section 4605(j) of title 50 (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)), section 2780 of title 22, section 2371 of title 22, or any other provision of law, as a country, the government of which has repeatedly provided support of acts of international terrorism; or
(III) in any other country or area of concern designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security under subparagraph (D); and
(ii) regardless of whether the alien is a national of a program country, the alien is not a national of—
(I) Iraq or Syria;
(II) a country that is designated, at the time the alien applies for admission, by the Secretary of State under section 4605(j) of title 50 (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)), section 2780 of title 22, section 2371 of title 22, or any other provision of law, as a country, the government of which has repeatedly provided support of acts of international terrorism; or
(III) any other country that is designated, at the time the alien applies for admission, by the Secretary of Homeland Security under subparagraph (D).

doing some digging finds this list

Dept of State Supporter of Intl Terrorism List

https://www.state.gov/j/ct/list/c14151.htm

Iran January 19, 1984
Sudan August 12, 1993
Syria December 29, 1979

and this:

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs ... er-program

Release Date: February 18, 2016

WASHINGTON—The Department of Homeland Security today announced that it is continuing its implementation of the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 with the addition of Libya, Somalia, and Yemen as three countries of concern, limiting Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals who have traveled to these countries.

So it appears the FUCKING MAD MAN found the loaded Chekhov's Phaser left in the cabinet by previous administrations (including Obama's) and used it. FUCKING MAD MAN.

(Full text of EO below)

PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. The visa-issuance process plays a crucial role in detecting individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States. Perhaps in no instance was that more apparent than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when State Department policy prevented consular officers from properly scrutinizing the visa applications of several of the 19 foreign nationals who went on to murder nearly 3,000 Americans. And while the visa-issuance process was reviewed and amended after the September 11 attacks to better detect would-be terrorists from receiving visas, these measures did not stop attacks by foreign nationals who were admitted to the United States.

Numerous foreign-born individuals have been convicted or implicated in terrorism-related crimes since September 11, 2001, including foreign nationals who entered the United States after receiving visitor, student, or employment visas, or who entered through the United States refugee resettlement program. Deteriorating conditions in certain countries due to war, strife, disaster, and civil unrest increase the likelihood that terrorists will use any means possible to enter the United States. The United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism.

In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including "honor" killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States; and to prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes.

Sec. 3. Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern.

(a) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately conduct a review to determine the information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and is not a security or public-safety threat.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President a report on the results of the review described in subsection (a) of this section, including the Secretary of Homeland Security's determination of the information needed for adjudications and a list of countries that do not provide adequate information, within 30 days of the date of this order. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a copy of the report to the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence.

(c) To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

(d) Immediately upon receipt of the report described in subsection (b) of this section regarding the information needed for adjudications, the Secretary of State shall request all foreign governments that do not supply such information to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notification.

(e) After the 60-day period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion on a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of foreign nationals (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas) from countries that do not provide the information requested pursuant to subsection (d) of this section until compliance occurs.

(f) At any point after submitting the list described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Homeland Security may submit to the President the names of any additional countries recommended for similar treatment.

(g) Notwithstanding a suspension pursuant to subsection (c) of this section or pursuant to a Presidential proclamation described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.

(h) The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall submit to the President a joint report on the progress in implementing this order within 30 days of the date of this order, a second report within 60 days of the date of this order, a third report within 90 days of the date of this order, and a fourth report within 120 days of the date of this order.

Sec. 4. Implementing Uniform Screening Standards for All Immigration Programs.

(a) The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall implement a program, as part of the adjudication process for immigration benefits, to identify individuals seeking to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis with the intent to cause harm, or who are at risk of causing harm subsequent to their admission. This program will include the development of a uniform screening standard and procedure, such as in-person interviews; a database of identity documents proffered by applicants to ensure that duplicate documents are not used by multiple applicants; amended application forms that include questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent; a mechanism to ensure that the applicant is who the applicant claims to be; a process to evaluate the applicant's likelihood of becoming a positively contributing member of society and the applicant's ability to make contributions to the national interest; and a mechanism to assess whether or not the applicant has the intent to commit criminal or terrorist acts after entering the United States.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of State, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of this directive within 60 days of the date of this order, a second report within 100 days of the date of this order, and a third report within 200 days of the date of this order.
Sec. 5. Realignment of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for Fiscal Year 2017. (a) The Secretary of State shall suspend the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days. During the 120-day period, the Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Homeland Security and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, shall review the USRAP application and adjudication process to determine what additional procedures should be taken to ensure that those approved for refugee admission do not pose a threat to the security and welfare of the United States, and shall implement such additional procedures. Refugee applicants who are already in the USRAP process may be admitted upon the initiation and completion of these revised procedures. Upon the date that is 120 days after the date of this order, the Secretary of State shall resume USRAP admissions only for nationals of countries for which the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence have jointly determined that such additional procedures are adequate to ensure the security and welfare of the United States.

(b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality. Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.

(c) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest.

(d) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017 would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I determine that additional admissions would be in the national interest.

(e) Notwithstanding the temporary suspension imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest -- including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious persecution, when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement, or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship -- and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States.

(f) The Secretary of State shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of the directive in subsection (b) of this section regarding prioritization of claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution within 100 days of the date of this order and shall submit a second report within 200 days of the date of this order.

(g) It is the policy of the executive branch that, to the extent permitted by law and as practicable, State and local jurisdictions be granted a role in the process of determining the placement or settlement in their jurisdictions of aliens eligible to be admitted to the United States as refugees. To that end, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall examine existing law to determine the extent to which, consistent with applicable law, State and local jurisdictions may have greater involvement in the process of determining the placement or resettlement of refugees in their jurisdictions, and shall devise a proposal to lawfully promote such involvement.

Sec. 6. Rescission of Exercise of Authority Relating to the Terrorism Grounds of Inadmissibility. The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall, in consultation with the Attorney General, consider rescinding the exercises of authority in section 212 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182, relating to the terrorism grounds of inadmissibility, as well as any related implementing memoranda.

Sec. 7. Expedited Completion of the Biometric Entry-Exit Tracking System.

(a) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric entry-exit tracking system for all travelers to the United States, as recommended by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the President periodic reports on the progress of the directive contained in subsection (a) of this section. The initial report shall be submitted within 100 days of the date of this order, a second report shall be submitted within 200 days of the date of this order, and a third report shall be submitted within 365 days of the date of this order. Further, the Secretary shall submit a report every 180 days thereafter until the system is fully deployed and operational.

Sec. 8. Visa Interview Security.

(a) The Secretary of State shall immediately suspend the Visa Interview Waiver Program and ensure compliance with section 222 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1222, which requires that all individuals seeking a nonimmigrant visa undergo an in-person interview, subject to specific statutory exceptions.

(b) To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary of State shall immediately expand the Consular Fellows Program, including by substantially increasing the number of Fellows, lengthening or making permanent the period of service, and making language training at the Foreign Service Institute available to Fellows for assignment to posts outside of their area of core linguistic ability, to ensure that non-immigrant visa-interview wait times are not unduly affected.

Sec. 9. Visa Validity Reciprocity. The Secretary of State shall review all nonimmigrant visa reciprocity agreements to ensure that they are, with respect to each visa classification, truly reciprocal insofar as practicable with respect to validity period and fees, as required by sections 221(c) and 281 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1201(c) and 1351, and other treatment. If a country does not treat United States nationals seeking nonimmigrant visas in a reciprocal manner, the Secretary of State shall adjust the visa validity period, fee schedule, or other treatment to match the treatment of United States nationals by the foreign country, to the extent practicable.

Sec. 10. Transparency and Data Collection.
(a) To be more transparent with the American people, and to more effectively implement policies and practices that serve the national interest, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall, consistent with applicable law and national security, collect and make publicly available within 180 days, and every 180 days thereafter:
(i) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; convicted of terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; or removed from the United States based on terrorism-related activity, affiliation, or material support to a terrorism-related organization, or any other national security reasons since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later;
(ii) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and engaged in terrorism-related acts, or who have provided material support to terrorism-related organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and
(iii) information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including honor killings, in the United States by foreign nationals, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and
(iv) any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses.
(b) The Secretary of State shall, within one year of the date of this order, provide a report on the estimated long-term costs of the USRAP at the Federal, State, and local levels.

Sec. 11. General Provisions.
(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP
THE WHITE HOUSE, January 27, 2017

[The Romulan Republic]

"Trump bars people (including green card holders) from the country on the basis of religion and nationality, Obama to blame"- Republicanism in a nutshell.

Nobody made him do this. And regardless of weather their's some older law he's basing it off of, its still bigotry, still hurting innocent people based on their religion and nationality, and still unConstitutional.

Go fuck yourself, collaborator.

[MKSheppard]

"Trump bars people (including green card holders) from the country on the basis of religion and nationality, Obama to blame"- Republicanism in a nutshell.

Maybe don't write shitty laws or do proclaimations over decades that get passed/said and forgotten in an attempt to feel good? You're just leaving UXO bomblets all over the place just waiting for a MAD MAN to activate them?

[The Romulan Republic]

"Trump bars people (including green card holders) from the country on the basis of religion and nationality, Obama to blame"- Republicanism in a nutshell.

Maybe don't write shitty law that gets passed and forgotten in an attempt to feel goods? You're just leaving UXO bomblets all over the place just waiting for a MAD MAN to activate them?

Obama was an incompetent compromiser in many respects, but that does not in any way lessen the vileness of what Trump is doing, or negate his personal responsibility.

[MKSheppard]

Obama was an incompetent compromiser in many respects, but that does not in any way lessen the vileness of what Trump is doing, or negate his personal responsibility.

Look at 8 USC 1324 (LINK) and fear.

[The Romulan Republic]

Laws don't trump the Constitution, and only a morally bankrupt coward hides behind law to justify a despotic act.

[Ralin]

I just think Ralin went too far when he asserted the entire US military and law enforcement establishment was eager to act as Trump's enforcers.

I don't think all of them will. Just most of them.

Or more precisely most of the ones that are in positions to make a substantial difference, and the rest will just kind of accept it once it's a done deal.

Because the leadership of the Department of Homeland Security=all of US law enforcement and military forces.

TRR?

It's been a week.

Think about that for a second.

In any case, the Homeland Security statement is contradictory. On the one hand, they say they will enforce Trump's Executive Orders, and on the other, that they will follow judicial orders. I've seen people interpreting this statement as both defiance of and compliance with the courts.

I think the implication is that by 'judicial orders' they mean 'the law,' and by 'the law' they mean Trump. Notice how they mention it in conjunction with how they handle people 'inconvenienced' by screenings and after saying they will obey Trump's Executive Orders.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'm not trying to understate how horrible and dangerous this situation is, far from it.

But I don't want to just jump to "Yes, the military and police will willingly serve as dictator Trump's enforcers" until we're sure that's the case, because a) its incredibly insulting to them, and b) it will lead people toward concluding either that violent revolt is the only recourse, or that their is no recourse at all, that the country is beyond saving so their's no point in protesting or fighting these things in court.

Its an unwarranted assumption as of yet, and its not a helpful one. Its not even the kind of alarmism that might possibly serve to mobilize people to do something useful, but the kind that will encourage people to conclude that their's no point doing anything. That's my fear.

[Broomstick]

The SpokesIdiot for Trump on Meet the Press this morning said that more countries could be added to the "no people from there" list, and suggested heavily that would be a good idea. He also said that American citizens traveling to and from those nations would also be subject to more screening and scrutiny and said that was a good thing because people going to and from such places must be up to no good.

Folks, don't try to whitewash what's happening. It's not the worst ever thing, but this is a very disturbing action on the part of the US Federal government.

So, we have a de facto ban on people based on nationality and religion entering the US, issued on Holocaust Remembrance Day, AND removed all reference to the Jews in the official White House recognition of Holocaust Remembrance Day. Either the White House crowd are that pig ignorant of what Holocaust Remembrance Day is about, or they've got an agenda they don't want to be honest about.

Now, I don't think this time around the Jews are going to be the target (at least in the US), no, it's obvious the primary targets here are Muslims (except casualties among any bystanders, though). But we've just started down the slippery slope and if we don't stop it things will get extraordinarily ugly. Again.

Turns out "Never Again" was "Never Again Until the People Who Actually Remember That Shit Largely Die Off".

[The Romulan Republic]

I can't imagine how this must look from the perspective of a WWII vet (those of them who don't fit the "old racist" guy stereotype, anyway). To spend their youth fighting fascism, and in their final years have to watch their country going down the same road. Its sickening.

[ray245]

I can't imagine how this must look from the perspective of a WWII vet (those of them who don't fit the "old racist" guy stereotype, anyway). To spend their youth fighting fascism, and in their final years have to watch their country going down the same road. Its sickening.

Because their children don't care about that, only what actions would retain their wealth and power. Americans never learnt the lessons of WW2 because the mainland is practically untouched by war.

[Dragon Angel]

Or, I suppose, the undesirable will come closer, no matter what we think.

No, the undesirable is already here.

It was a reference to violence coming about soon, but I wanted to keep it discreet since I didn't feel like getting into an argument again with a certain someone who has a trigger finger for mentions of the word violence in here.

Worth noting that the Executive Order in question allows entry into the country from those nations if the person entering is Christian. It does not, however, allow entry into the country if the person entering is Jewish. So, the fact that he signed this order explicitly keeping Jewish refugees out on Holocaust Remembrance Day is, y'know, horrifying.

This will be a sobering point to bring up to the Jewish parts of my family who voted for / supported Trump. I wonder what they'll think of it.

Though, one of them is already thinking "my god, what's going on" at Muslims being targeted, so, let's see...

Quite apart from Saudi Arabia not being on the list, I am drawn to wonder if minority religion will include Sunni in a Shia country or visa versa...

General American view of Islam is that of a singular religion, not one with multiple sects like Protestant Christianity. It's shown in so many people's conflation of radical Wahhabist and Salafist doctrines with all 1.6 billion Muslims on the planet, so, I very much doubt that would be the case.

It worth bringing up to understand WHY Trump is able to get away with pissing all over the Constitution likes its a Moscow hotel bed. Why its people are willing to condemn people to die for their own lives, even just for their own comfort, why calling it madness seems to play it off as some act of complete bonkers lunacy when its a completely understood and in their minds justified reaction to what they believe to be threats to their own life and the lives of their own.

You want to stop this madness? You need to understand the cause of it, you need to understand the mindset of those who allow it to happen. Not even by sympathetic but aware of the reasons.

Because this act of bullshit happened because thousands, possibly millions of people were perfectly fine with doing it. The way to stop this crap is to get people to stop believing in the bullshit that lead to it, stop people believing they are damned to car bombs and suicide vests should they let in the refugees.

People give Trump power, need to understand the people who do so if we ever want to take away Trumps power like he's Firelord Luke.

We already understand them and their psychology. That's what Simon is saying. The part we didn't understand until the election is the degree to which it pervaded American society. And god damn does it pervade American society.

We already know why this has been building up. It is much different from knowing how far it's built up. One is qualitative, the other quantitative. It's a waste of society's CPU cycles to keep on examining the why when we need to examine the total.

However Trumpolini (I so want to borrow that, its fucking excellent) is not a dictator, might be in the future but maybe not, and his actions thus far have been bad but not really on the level of atrocities past.

Do we need Hitler committing the Final Solution for us to recognize that he is bad? Or would it not be better to stop Hitler once he gets 90% close to there?

Let's not make any mistake. If Trump ignores the law, that's a bad signal. It's a signal that he will continue forward. We may not be at 90% now, but that we can see it coming very soon ... that is something no one can ignore.

[Highlord Laan]

No, probably not, although its what they should do.

But at least the Democrats seem to be collectively realizing that Trump is not someone they can work with as if he was any other President. Too little too late, but maybe, just maybe, we'll begin to see some fucking backbone from them, in time to at least constrain his actions and salvage something of our democracy.

Don't hold your breath. Martin Niemöller knew what he was talking about; a depressingly small percentage of people are willing to do anything proactive about issues that don't affect them personally, and even fewer will get angry enough to set some shit on fire, which is what it seems to take for a government to even acknowledge a protest is happening these days.

It actually took us, what, a dozen posts to get to thinly veiled incitement of violence. At this point, I'm only surprised it took so long.

Can we at least give the courts and Congress a chance to shoot this down before we go to mobs in the streets?

You mean the other two branches of the government that a mob of frothing retards handed over to fascists? Why even bother trying, when we know full well that neither will move a finger to do anything?

[The Romulan Republic]

Or, I suppose, the undesirable will come closer, no matter what we think.

No, the undesirable is already here.

It was a reference to violence coming about soon, but I wanted to keep it discreet since I didn't feel like getting into an argument again with a certain someone who has a trigger finger for mentions of the word violence in here.

Except you clearly are willing to have that argument again, as evidenced by your snide, thinly-veiled jab at me, so you should have the guts to do so openly, rather than taking passive aggressive pot shots at me over a topic in another thread.

I will also be bringing this comment to the attention of the moderators.

As to the rest- we all know that you are making a concerted effort to convince people that violence is inevitable and the only solution, despite your increasingly unconvincing bleetings that its not what you really want. This ignores the fact that while such things are possible in the future, as of now, people are not being sent to death camps, or enslaved, or massacred, all of which could happen in the event of large scale political violence in America. And it ignores that, Trump's apparent delusions to the contrary, the democratic institutions of America are not all dead. The courts are still prepared to stand up to him, and their has been a strong surge of non-violent opposition from many Americans to this executive order.

If, God forbid, the day comes that he uses armed force to resist the courts' lawful rulings, as some have speculated, then maybe we can talk about weather violence is justified. But let's at least wait and see weather we reach that point before eagerly grasping for any justification to spill blood.

As terrible as the current situation is, yes, large scale political violence would be immeasurably worse, and offer no guarantee of actually solving anything either. Two points which you cannot refute.

[The Romulan Republic]

Don't hold your breath. Martin Niemöller knew what he was talking about; a depressingly small percentage of people are willing to do anything proactive about issues that don't affect them personally, and even fewer will get angry enough to set some shit on fire, which is what it seems to take for a government to even acknowledge a protest is happening these days.

It actually took us, what, a dozen posts to get to thinly veiled incitement of violence. At this point, I'm only surprised it took so long.

Can we at least give the courts and Congress a chance to shoot this down before we go to mobs in the streets?

You mean the other two branches of the government that a mob of frothing retards handed over to fascists? Why even bother trying, when we know full well that neither will move a finger to do anything?

You mean the courts that just ordered a stay on portions of Trump's executive order after less than a day? Or the Supreme Court that would need at least two or three new Justices to be a Trump rubber stamp? Both just recently discussed in this very thread?

Comments like this show that you are not basing your despicable support for political violence (aka terrorism) on necessity, or even perceived necessity, because you are lying through your teeth in order to justify it.

To which I say:

The last American Civil War killed over 600,000 plus people. It burned cities to the ground. It was fought primarily with single shot firearms, when the population of the US was a tiny fraction of what it is today.

A repeat today would be a horror beyond imagining.

Are you really so twisted that that is something you want? Or do you naively believe that you can be be guaranteed a "short, victorious war", where only "the bad guys" suffer and die?

[The Romulan Republic]

So apparently they're now saying it won't apply to green card holders.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/p ... arred.html

WASHINGTON — A top White House official appeared to reverse a key part of President Trump’s immigration order on Sunday, saying that people from the affected countries who hold green cards will not be prevented from returning to the United States.

But the official, Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff, also said that border agents had “discretionary authority” to detain and question suspicious travelers from certain countries. That statement seemed to add to the uncertainty over how the executive order will be interpreted and enforced in the days ahead.

Part of the president’s order gives preferential treatment to Christians who try to enter the United States from majority-Muslim countries. In a Twitter post on Sunday morning, Mr. Trump deplored the killings of Christians in the Middle East without noting the killings of Muslims, who have been killed in vastly greater numbers in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere.


Mr. Trump asserted last week that Christians had been “treated horribly” under previous administrations. “If you were a Muslim, you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible,” he said Friday in an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network. “I thought it was very, very unfair. So we are going to help them.”

Continue reading the main story
RELATED COVERAGE


Republicans in Congress Growing Restive Over Trump Refugee Policy JAN. 29, 2017

Rulings on Trump’s Immigration Order Are First Step on Long Legal Path JAN. 29, 2017

Christian Leaders Denounce Trump’s Plan to Favor Christian Immigrants JAN. 29, 2017
In a second Twitter message on Sunday, the president said that the United States needed strong borders and “extreme vetting” to protect itself from terrorists. He cited Europe and “indeed, the world” as evidence that the United States must shut its borders to potential threats.


The president’s order, enacted with the stroke of a pen at 4:42 p.m. Eastern on Friday, suspended entry of all refugees to the United States for 120 days, barred Syrian refugees indefinitely and blocked entry into the United States for 90 days for citizens of seven predominantly Muslim countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

A series of rulings by federal judges across the country blocked part of the president’s actions, preventing the government from deporting some travelers who found themselves ensnared by the presidential order. But the court decisions largely stopped short of letting them into the country or issuing a broader ruling on the constitutionality of Mr. Trump’s actions.

Lawyers for those denied entry said on Sunday that there was significant confusion and disagreement among border agents about who was affected by Mr. Trump’s order.

In a statement Sunday morning, the Department of Homeland Security said that agents would “continue to enforce all of President Trump’s executive orders,” and that “prohibited travel will remain prohibited.” But it also said that the department “will comply with judicial orders.”

The confusion was evident in the handling of those who have valid green cards, making them legal permanent residents of the United States.

On Saturday night, the Department of Homeland Security said that Mr. Trump’s order did apply to green card holders who were traveling to the United States from the seven countries affected.

White House officials reiterated that position in a briefing for reporters on Saturday afternoon, saying that green card holders from the seven countries would need a case-by-case waiver to return.

Mr. Priebus appeared to change that position Sunday morning. “As far as green card holders, moving forward, it doesn’t affect them,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” program.

He defended Mr. Trump’s order, saying it had been carried out smoothly and was protecting Americans from terrorist threats. On Saturday, a day after the order was issued, airports were marked by scenes of confusion and protest as officials tried to interpret the order, including how to handle green card holders.

Around the globe on Saturday, legal residents of the United States who hold valid green cards and approved visas were blocked from boarding planes overseas or detained for hours in American airports.

Mr. Priebus said several times during the NBC interview that green card holders would not be subject to the order “going forward.” But he repeatedly suggested that anyone, including American citizens, who traveled from any of the seven predominantly Muslim countries identified in the order would be subjected to additional scrutiny.

First Draft
Every weekday, get political news and analysis from the staff of The New York Times.

Sign Up

Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

SEE SAMPLE PRIVACY POLICY
“If you’re an American citizen traveling back and forth to Libya, you are likely to be subjected to further questioning when you come into an airport,” Mr. Priebus said. He added later, “There is discretionary authority that a customs and border patrol agent has when they suspect that someone is up to no good when they travel back and forth to Libya or Yemen.”

Mr. Priebus said that travelers from the seven countries would be “subjected, temporarily, with more questioning, until a better system is put in place.”

Mr. Trump — in office just a week — has found himself accused of constitutional and legal overreach with his executive order. Large crowds of protesters turned out at airports around the country to denounce Mr. Trump’s ban.

Lawyers who sued the government to block the White House order said the judge’s decision could affect an estimated 100 to 200 people who were detained upon arrival at American airports.

Judge Ann M. Donnelly of Federal District Court in Brooklyn, who was nominated by former President Barack Obama, ruled just before 9 p.m. Saturday that carrying out Mr. Trump’s order by sending the travelers home could cause them “irreparable harm.” She said the government was “enjoined and restrained from, in any manner and by any means, removing individuals” who had arrived in the United States with valid visas or refugee status.

The ruling does not appear to force the administration to let in people otherwise blocked by Mr. Trump’s order who have not yet traveled to the United States.

The judge’s one-page ruling came swiftly after lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union testified in her courtroom that one of the people detained at an airport was being put on a plane to be deported back to Syria at that very moment.

Hundreds of people waited outside the courthouse chanting “Set them free!” as lawyers made their case. When the crowd learned that Judge Donnelly had ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, a rousing cheer went up in the crowd.

Minutes after the judge’s ruling in New York, another judge, Leonie M. Brinkema of Federal District Court in Virginia, issued a temporary restraining order for a week to block the removal of any green card holders being detained at Dulles International Airport.

Throughout the day on Saturday, there were numerous reports of students attending American universities who were blocked from returning to the United States from visits abroad. One student said in a Twitter post that he would be unable to study at Yale. Another who attends the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was refused permission to board a plane. A Sudanese graduate student at Stanford University was blocked for hours from entering the country.

Human rights groups reported that legal permanent residents of the United States who hold green cards were being stopped in foreign airports as they sought to return from funerals, vacations or study abroad.

The White House said the restrictions would protect “the United States from foreign nationals entering from countries compromised by terrorism” and allow the administration time to put in place “a more rigorous vetting process.” But critics condemned Mr. Trump over the collateral damage on people who had no sinister intentions in trying to come to the United States.

White House aides said on Saturday that there had been consultations with State Department and homeland security officials about carrying out the order. “Everyone who needed to know was informed,” one aide said.

But that assertion was denied by multiple officials with knowledge of the interactions, including two officials at the State Department. Leaders of Customs and Border Protection and of Citizenship and Immigration Services — the two agencies most directly affected by the order — were on a telephone briefing on the new policy even as Mr. Trump signed it on Friday, two officials said.

They've also apparently clarified that it won't apply to Canadian duel citizens.

It doesn't justify this vile order, of course, and the struggle is nowhere near over, but its a start.

And look, we didn't have to shoot anyone in the streets to accomplish it.

[Highlord Laan]

You mean the ruling that he NSA completely ignored, and wasn't followed by orders to arrest those doing so? The supreme court is a paper tiger, and everyone knows it. Il Duce and his followers will ignore them, just like those in the NSA already have.

[The Romulan Republic]

You mean the ruling that he NSA completely ignored, and wasn't followed by orders to arrest those doing so? The supreme court is a paper tiger, and everyone knows it. Il Duce and his followers will ignore them, just like those in the NSA already have.

To which order are you referring? The Supreme Court has not ruled on the current case, so I'm not sure to which past event you are referring, and how it relates to this situation.

To claim that the Supreme Court is without power is also highly premature. Last year it had enough power to make legal gay marriage the universal law of the land, to take one example.

[Highlord Laan]

You mean the ruling that he NSA completely ignored, and wasn't followed by orders to arrest those doing so? The supreme court is a paper tiger, and everyone knows it. Il Duce and his followers will ignore them, just like those in the NSA already have.

To which order are you referring? The Supreme Court has not ruled on the current case, so I'm not sure to which past event you are referring, and how it relates to this situation.

To claim that the Supreme Court is without power is also highly premature. Last year it had enough power to make legal gay marriage the universal law of the land, to take one example.

Which was also the year the repukes castrated the supreme court by refusing to allow a new judge to be appointed that didn't fit their ideological purity requirement. Which will be corrected now, of course, making the SC a rubber stamp for the fascists. Even more so after a few more retire soon.

[The Romulan Republic]

You mean the ruling that he NSA completely ignored, and wasn't followed by orders to arrest those doing so? The supreme court is a paper tiger, and everyone knows it. Il Duce and his followers will ignore them, just like those in the NSA already have.

To which order are you referring? The Supreme Court has not ruled on the current case, so I'm not sure to which past event you are referring, and how it relates to this situation.

To claim that the Supreme Court is without power is also highly premature. Last year it had enough power to make legal gay marriage the universal law of the land, to take one example.

Which was also the year the repukes castrated the supreme court by refusing to allow a new judge to be appointed that didn't fit their ideological purity requirement. Which will be corrected now, of course, making the SC a rubber stamp for the fascists. Even more so after a few more retire soon.

And you again ignore the point that replacing Scalia with a far Right judge (just like Scalia was already) will not be enough to make the court a Trump rubber-stamp.

Again, you are lying to justify armed revolt. This is despicable.

Edit: I also note you provided no source or clarification as to which court case you were referring to.

Its bad enough when people honestly believe that violence is necessary. They're wrong, and dangerous, but not necessarily evil in intent. But you... you're building an argument based on horse shit, which makes me suspect that you're arguing not what you believe is necessary, but an excuse to do what you want to do.

[Dragon Angel]

Except you clearly are willing to have that argument again, as evidenced by your snide, thinly-veiled jab at me, so you should have the guts to do so openly, rather than taking passive aggressive pot shots at me over a topic in another thread.

I will also be bringing this comment to the attention of the moderators.

Oh lord, fuck off. I answered Broomstick's question since I had the impression she thought I was saying something else, and if you want to get at me for not wanting to bring your attention to me (which, well, I succeeded since someone who posted later than me was the one who got your attention first) then go ahead.

As to the rest- we all know that you are making a concerted effort to convince people that violence is inevitable and the only solution, despite your increasingly unconvincing bleetings that its not what you really want. This ignores the fact that while such things are possible in the future, as of now, people are not being sent to death camps, or enslaved, or massacred, all of which could happen in the event of large scale political violence in America. And it ignores that, Trump's apparent delusions to the contrary, the democratic institutions of America are not all dead. The courts are still prepared to stand up to him, and their has been a strong surge of non-violent opposition from many Americans to this executive order.

If, God forbid, the day comes that he uses armed force to resist the courts' lawful rulings, as some have speculated, then maybe we can talk about weather violence is justified. But let's at least wait and see weather we reach that point before eagerly grasping for any justification to spill blood.

As terrible as the current situation is, yes, large scale political violence would be immeasurably worse, and offer no guarantee of actually solving anything either. Two points which you cannot refute.

I don't have the time or energy to argue with your delusional opinion of me so I'm just going to let you believe what you wish. We actually, probably, most likely agree on the majority of issues but you like to take anyone who suggests the possibility of violence occurring and beat on it like it's the most forbidden nope it will never happen idea to pass. Of all ideas that have been suggested here and in the past. And to top THAT off, you caricature them as virtually thugs itching for a bloody violent revolution. I can't even bring up the idea without you blathering about the horrors of violence when you damn know well I am aware of that, Laan is aware of that, Zaune is aware of that, we all are aware of that.

At some point it looks like you're just questing for ideological purity and that is just fucking annoying to deal with from you.

[Broomstick]

They've also apparently clarified that it won't apply to Canadian duel citizens.

[nitpick] This error is REALLY grating on my nerves. It is DUAL citizenship, not "duel". "Duel" is a fight, like the one between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton that got Hamilton dead. Any other nationality aside, this is particularly inappropriate in reference to Canadians which are not known for being particularly violent, for fighting, or for dueling. I've tried to soften this criticism with a bit of levity, but please start using the correct term DUAL citizenship before my head asplodes. Thank you. [/nitpick]