Is The Trump Executive Order On Refugees Constitutional?

donald_trump_president-elect_portrait_croppedLate Friday, President Donald Trump carried out one of his primary campaign promised this week with a suspension on the entry of all refugees to the United States and an order for “extreme vetting” as a condition for entry for some foreign citizens.  The order below specifically suspends entry of all refugees to the United States for 120 days, bars Syrian refugees indefinitely, and blocks entry into the United States for 90 days for citizens from seven countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.  The order had immediate impact on travelers who were denied entry to the United States and held at some airports like JFK.  Lawsuits have already been filed challenging the executive order but those challenges will face a considerable challenge in seeking an injunction by a federal court.

Curiously, the order notes the 9-11 attacks but the order does not cover the countries that were the sources for those attackers, including Saudi Arabia and UAE.   I think that this order is a mistake and contradicts our values.  However, I do not agree with some of my colleagues at GW and other law schools that the order is clearly unconstitutional.  Courts are not supposed to rule on the merits of such laws but their legality.  I think that the existing precedent favors Trump.

First, this is not a religious ban. When it was first discussed on the campaign, it was described as a ban on Muslims.  This is not a religious ban. It certainly can be opposed as having that effect but there are a wide array of Muslim countries not covered by the ban and would not be impacted by the restrictions.  A court cannot in my view treat this order as carrying out a religious ban as it is currently written.  (Trump’s comments that he wants to prioritize Christians could raise more compelling arguments of religious discrimination).

Second, the law largely suspends entry pending the creation of new vetting procedures.  That is based on a national security determination made by the President. Courts have generally deferred to such judgments.  A president’s authority is at its zenith on our borders. Hillary Clinton herself campaigned on carefully vetting refugees (though she favors increasing such entries). In  a November 2015 national security speech at the Council on Foreign Relations, Clinton said “So yes, we do need to be vigilant in screening and vetting any refugees from Syria, guided by the best judgment of our security professionals in close coordination with our allies and partners.”

Finally, there is precedent for limited entry from particular countries going back to some of the earliest periods in this country.  The earlier immigration laws include  the 1875 Page Act which focused on Asian immigrants and those believes to be engaged in prostitution or considered convicts in their native countries.  Then there was the infamous  1882 Chinese Exclusion Act.  Then there were other measures limiting immigration from particular areas like the  1906 “Gentleman’s Agreement” (Japanese aliens) and the or the 1917 Immigration Act (“Asiatic Barred Zone”).  In 1921 and 1924, Congress passed the “Quota Acts” limiting entry from disfavored countries.   of nations from whom no further immigrants would be accepted. In every case, immigration policy continued to develop as a series of widening, discriminatory exclusions.  It was not until 1965 that we broke from our long and troubling history is such discrimination.  However, The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act contains section, 212(f) that gives sweeping authority on the exclusion of certain aliens:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

Even President Jimmy Carter used such authority.  Executive Order 12172 involves an order to force 50,000 Iranian students living in the United States report to an immigration office and face possible deportation. Thousands were deported.  Indeed, President Obama repeatedly claimed sweeping executive authority over such national security and immigration policies.  As recently as 2016, the Obama Administration opposed courts even ruling on issues of executive power on immigration, insisting that “complex debates over immigration policy that the Constitution reserves to the political Branches of the National Government.”  Democratic members supported those arguments, including many who filed in support of the executive power.

None of this means that I personally support this action. I do not. However, one’s personal views should not influence one’s constitutional analysis in such a case.  There are grounds to challenge the order and they are not frivolous. However, the precedent supports President Trump. Here is the executive order:

“Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.” Following is the language of that order, as supplied by the White House.

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 orderwithin 30 days of the date of this order, a second report within 60 daysof 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 InadmissibilityThe 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 ReciprocityThe 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.

224 thoughts on “Is The Trump Executive Order On Refugees Constitutional?”

  1. Thank you attorney Turley for bringing order and focus to this topic. It is to your credit that you make distinctions between the social and legal considerations and analysis of this EO.

    You also clearly have a firm grasp on the difference between a person’s own sense of their sentiments and their grasp on that which is within their power, whether they are a public official or a private citizen, or foreign national, as the case may be.

    The basis of my further gratitude is for your candor, and finally, for your integrity, legal scholarship and willingness to share of your judicial experience, for the edification of the ordinary citizen.

    One last thing: You have a lot of courage. I have been seeking your writings and public statements on topics of this kind for the past four years and consider your contributions to public discourse to be exemplary.

    I only wish you had been in the loop on the discussion leading to the drafting of this EO, because, if it is regrettable as a matter of policy, even if one of short duration, a different path to address national security worries might have resulted. Godspeed.

    1. But the suspension was, as it turns out from the lates treports in the news ony….temporary. Either way it doesn’t affect phase II

  2. Jonathan Turdly is officially the least passionate man on earth! His interview last Sunday with Rula Jebreal was beyond the most embarrassing I have seen in a long time! Rula owned you Turdly! You are a complete JOKE!

    1. Is that fake news or is there some hope for you sharing the source of the rant? At this point those of us in different parts of the world are asking What is a Rula and why should we care?

    1. What can I say. La Bandera Rosa has spoken! Tune in for tomorrow’s version….tomorow.

    1. LMARWBAO. politico is a POS but to get back to Branson Island and Obumble he left on Executive One for Arizona and apparently no one mentioned the weather. Everyone and their brother knew chances of landing were slim and chances of playing golf in soggy sand were nil.

      But don’t feel bad for whats his name he’s NOT hurting. Goes his whole life without working one day and then goes to Branson Island. Ole Richard doesn’t rent that out for chump change and one years retirement salary will get you about three days and two nights.

      Now we have to wonder. Can he get back in the country for 88 more days? If the detail didnt tell him about the weather think they would remember that minor detail? Hmmmm does he have a visa? Does he have a passport and finally. Where’s Michelle Antoinette? Did she get left in the desert?

      Sof whoever wrote the opening blurb about the Bahamas …THANK YOU

      Perfect end to the career of one of the bottom five.

        1. I may have miss spelled that LMRWBAO makes more sense. Hey it took me a year to spell TANSTAAFL! BOHICA I mastered on the first try.

    1. All the guy did was take vacations for eight years. People need to tell him where to stuff it.

    2. Most normal politicians whose policies and governance were resoundly rejected and defeated by the voters in such an astounding way would just go quietly away and exit stage left. But not the arrogant, narcisscist, community organizer fake messiah boy wonder. People should revolt simply because He (the Royal He) is utterly lacking the shame gene or any sense of decorum (just like the Clinton’s). And to have his statement issued by his spokesman from Richard Branson’s private island in the Carribean where he is freeloading once again makes it even more unpalatable. Obama just spend last week freeloading in Palm Springs, CA at his interior designer’s home that he shares with his husband, Obama’s former Ambassador to Spain. Didn’t the Obama’s just get back from their last 3 week Hawaiian holiday tax-payer subsidized vacation, like not even four weeks ago? God, I can’t stand this POS Obama – or the media….or the Hollywood morons who prop him and his ego up.

      1. ‘that he shares with his husband, ‘

        Really? God Bless the absent spell checker.

        1. Really. ‘His husband’ is correct. I cannot find the articles where I first saw the reference, but I have seen it written several times.

          The Obama’s flew out to Palm Springs to stay at the home of James Costos, Obama’s ambassador to Spain and Angora, and L.A.-based designer Michael S. Smith, who also redecorated the White House while the Obamas lived there.

          Remember all those vacations Michelle took to Spain? Yeah, Freeloaders.

          I’d bet Richard Branson invited them to stay at his island as his guests. Obama’s are freeloaders – just like most Democrats. The Clinton’s wrote the book on freeloading.

          1. OK I just wanted to check and see if his husband didnt mean his wife or her husband.

    3. Sorry for the rant. I was just given perspective: Don’t get mad; just enjoy Obama’s pathetic attempts to stay relevant.

      1. Looking at another part of the puzzle here’s a comment and then my comment It is part of Conway’s take on the 51 vote rule and McConnel and Shumer acting like he’s a somebody. and the big question is it really 52 plus or is their a traitor in the Senate?

        “….Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., using the so-called “nuclear option” to change filibuster rules and force Trump’s nominee through the Senate with a simple 51-vote majority.

        “We should take a look at all of our options and I think [former Democratic Senate Majority Leader] Harry Reid probably regrets the day that he went so nuclear with the nuclear option because now his party is no longer in power,” Conway said. “That’s up to Leader McConnell and his colleagues. I’m supportive of a fair and full process.”

        Conway also fired back at Obama’s criticism of Trump’s controversial executive order suspending refugee processing and immigration from certain countries.

        “He’s welcome to say what he wants. It’s a free country, including for ex-Presidents,” Conway said. “[But] this is temporary, it is 90 days and it is very narrowly restricted to seven countries that none other than President Obama’s administration identified as high risk for harboring, training, and exporting terrorists.”

        I left the last part in to round out a bit of reality.

        So the question is McCain playing lone no make that loanable woof. He’s certainly a RINO looking for a Master which makes him left wing as always. He’s not a supporter of the Constitutional Republic that I’ve noticed. And he’s lookijng for bowls of puppy chow and looking across the aisle or whereever for a new leash and chain. Either that or he’s looking for some good pork deal in an anti pork atmosphere. Which puts him, McConnel and Ryan in the same boat.

        They have to prove themselves and do it quickly to the moderate center or the get targeted and this time no second or third chances. We don’t have to worry about the distraction of Von Klinton this next time.

        That makes it 51 nuclear to 48 or 49 BUT there are some looking to jump the other way. I’d say make the deal get the IDC group Independent Democratic Coalition grop, go nuclear get rid of the powerless nobodies and crush Stupid Shumer and the rest of the far left clones at the same time. A good many do not want to be Identified with the white identify secular progressives and IDC is the way to do it and get a good committee assignment etc.

        And that’s just the smiley face of the moderate center.

        1. The Republican’s will have to go nuclear on Trump’s pick for Supreme Court. The Head Clown will make sure they don’t have the votes. McCain is an idiot, not sure about the ‘useful’ part. The Democrats see him as their ‘bitch.’ I see him and all I can think is “Term Limits.”

      2. This just hit my computer screen at 10:15 Mountain Time Ms. Yates is now an ex -employee of the governmet.

        To leave room for others after reading some of the expected comments. Pelosi and Shumer wouldnt recognize the Constitution if was a red hot poker inserted in the appropriate receptacle.

        Next thing is the nuclear option right under Shumer’s chair in the congressional chambers. And a reminder to McCain to dance with the one that brought you or go home and listen to Wolfman Jack.

  3. I have a question: If preference cannot be given legally to religious minorities facing genocide (such as Christians or Izidis, for example), would we still be able to have granted refuge to the Jews during the Holocaust under today’s laws? Is this a result of some sort of change in the law?

    It seems absurd to me that we cannot grant refuge to minorities facing genocide…..

    1. One of my major differences with the Kerry Obama policy which let in 50,000 plus Musliims vs. 55 others. add Jew, Bahais and one other whose name I also forgot. AND Kurds. The bigotry was part religious and part political with that bunch.

      WWII and the Holocaust it was the policy of the FDR State Department to deny entry to refugees who were Jewish or Italian (Catholic.) As a secular progressive dictator he did nothing to apply the principles of representative democracy or Constitutional Law and instead followed the world wide socialist movement introducing a form of it in our country.

      However look at the context of the times. The bulk of the citizens including newly arrived iimmigrants, and then look at your birth certificate.

      You were not and are not responsibile for that which happened prior to the day you were allowed to vote.

      But having voted, paid taxes, served on a jury, taken government money for college tuition or been drafted and the took the oath anyway, you accepted the social contract and from that point on ARE responsibile.

      The poiicies of those time would have been curiously similar to the policies of Obama and Kerry and prior to Kerry to Clinton.

      Many who stayed at the State Department were today questioned as to their willingness to follow current policy or work against it. The blunt answer was if they couldn’t they wouldn’t have a job. It is not hard to dump a government employee unions or not. All it takes is pulling their security clearance. Guess whose in charge of that for the Executive Branch.

      1. Sir, you have not explained Jonathon’s (and others’) statement that the Christian preference within the Order is potentially illegal. Is it perhaps because it singles out ONLY Christians as opposed to other similarly threatened religious minorities?

        You could have been thinking of the Zoroastrians or Druze perhaps…?

        1. First it wasn’t the Zoroastrians although they are one of the nine perhaps by now ten monotheistic religions of the world. The current list is Druze, Yazidi, Mhallami, Arab Christians, Mandaeans, Bahai and Kurds. Somehow I think one is still missing from the list. Kerry’s operation let in some but was weighted heavily to the Islamics and heavily prejudiced against the the others of which one were the Christian Arabs. Nothing he didn’t know it’s been a one of contention for over three years with the refugee and relief people.

          Right now I’m not finding any preference to the minorities until the status is reviewed exept the USA being heavily Christian would tend to, in it’s comments, be expected to tilt that way. One of the other Christian nations is Italian and the church effort their in Syria leader is a non Catholic of course they are Christian too but to FDR it apparently made a difference.

          The Judge did not address that issue only the one on detaining those with valid Visas. But it’s all going to be looked at before it’s done.

          the 50,000 plus to 55 ratio though was a more than a little bit transparent and arrogant on the part of the former Secretary of State. Better he goes back to making ketchup.

          1. Kurds are not a minority as such being Muslim but re in Syria as one of the groups persecuted in Syria and Iraq and Turkey and their homeland is parts of of each of the three with lines drawn by the British so like the Jewish people they deserve their country back. Something ticks in my mind about refugees of a separate religion who escaped from Jordan and/or Lebanon

        2. I supposed Attorney Turley could elaborate on that but I would note that there is a difference between sentiments (including ones expressed hastily based on possibly loaded questions and cherrypicked quotes, or even the selecting of one sort of representative of a general idea…like, Papa Smurf is blue…and the feedback being “what’s wrong with you, why didn’t you say all smurfs are blue.” The very essence of asylum is being persecuted for a range of differences that will not be tolerated by those with hegemony. Those who persecute cannot enter the US, those who are persecuted as described in our law, if otherwise admissible, can be considered for entry into the US. In my example, Christians would be Papa Smurf. No one has accused Trump of exercising elaborate rhetoric in getting his general ideas across. But I doubt that (and most honest people realize) he doesn’t care for and about a Yazidi or Druze or Kurd, or even the “wrong flavor” of Muslim, etc…. who will die for their faith, at the hands of the juggernaut of butchers. Don’t hold your breath for the disingenuous press to ever ask him this question: “Do you mean JUST Christians, or all those who are being butchered and enslaved. ”

          I’m curious whether it’s considered common or not for a severability clause to appear in these EO’s.

          1. “But I doubt that (and most honest people realize) he doesn’t care for and about a Yazidi or Druze or Kurd, or even the “wrong flavor” of Muslim,”

            You are allowed to doubt (but you do not speak for people who are honest only in your own opinion – and may not put words into their mouths and then involuntarily enlist them in what ever it is you are doing.) You speak ONLY for yourself. Just asI do when I say ‘decent people do not bote for the regressives’ since it’ my definition of ‘decent, I cannot tell you who they are or if they voted or not.’

            So what you are left with is doubting something but have no reason other than your own conclusions which so far, stand alone.

            Do you understand the distinction? Saying is not the same as doing and saying is not the same as speaking the truth ….or lying. It’s just. the voice of internal reason strugglinmg to free itself from the collective mantra of the day.

    1. I did and made some posts and it was well worth a regular stop. Unlike some of the crap we run into. Keep up the good work. I’ll be sure to present an opposite viewpoint whenever possible.

  4. The logic speaks for itself. You build a wall so that you can economize on border patrol officers. The assumption is that the wall will do the work of the officers. The illegals will find a way under or over.

    Read the papers, other than Fox News and The Washington Times.

    Sections of the border might have walls, in and around urban areas where they can be augmented with more officers. However, the proven way is to intercept them rapidly and send them back. This takes more technology and more officers. You read it here.

    1. Isaac finally got soemthing right but left out a lot.

      The border with Mexico used to be heavily patrolled until Obama stood down the military and cut the Border Patrol .Bush’s wall was finished but as said only where it coudl be seen from t he border and the program was cut by Obama. This has been presented ‘here’ multiple times. Isaac you finally woke up! When the State of Arizona begged for troops or federal LEA to shut down a major cartel highway he ignored them and instead ran a gun running program to Mexico. Yes Isaac we know it well WTF were you? Takes more than sitting on your butt commenting 10 and 15 years later. Meanwhile Hillary set the example.

      I don’t know where Isaac lives but it isn’t on or near the border and it isn’t in reality. Day late Peso short.

      Side note. The military runs an anti human traficking program – a power point demonstration. Takes about 10 minutes requied once or twice a year. After it’s over and the records filled out the troops head down town in palaces like Verona Italy, Xania in Crete and Dubai Power Point is forgotten. Congress is happy and the press is mollified Meanswhile in Seattle, Las Vegas AND Washington DC you only have to ask a bell boy or a cab driver. And I’m not talking over 21 ‘sex workers.’

      Nothing has really changed except the penicillin order.

      Not to worry this news is never commented on when it’s posted. Just ignored . No matter the ages involved.

      1. Here and other blogs. in the 90’s and the last sixteen. years. Know what? IT will be ignored this time as well. It takes more than making a movie.

  5. The ‘wall’ that DDT threatens to build has been debunked by Republicans who voted for DDT that live in Texas along the border. They say that more officers and better technology is what is required. If a wall is built the surveillance by warm bodies will subside and the illegals will find a way over or under the ‘wall’. Metaphorically, a wall is necessary, composed of more officers, more technology in the air and on the ground, and perhaps some cooperation from the Mexicans in terms of a heads up. The statements by DDT regarding a physical wall and Mexico is going to pay for it, are the rantings of a mentally unhinged spoiled brat. One might think he is still campaigning for the Senate elections in two years and his own two years after that. However, a little level headedness and some positive results would get him more votes than this nonsense.

    The latest unstable rants and moves further illustrate that there are some serious problems under that yellow rug. A simple phone call to tighten existing procedures would have accomplished much the same thing and with none of the spooky baggage. In the mind of an unhinged person it might not appear Presidential. DDT is creating a hostile environment and the enemies on which to focus. Reagan did it with the USSR, that was toppling over before he came to office and gave it a final shove. Bush did it by invading Iraq; you don’t change Presidents in a time of crisis and two wars ongoing, later bungled. Now DDT is using the same rally round the leader routine by exaggerating existing conditions and whipping up his minions to a near frenzy.

    The simple facts of the matter are that there is no need to play the ‘wall game’ with Mexico and ruining peoples’ lives by revoking visas and not recognizing green card status are the moves of a mentally unstable person. DDT is President of the US and either he still can’t believe it so he is acting out some fantasy or he is stupid and/or unbalanced.

    A few years ago his butler was interviewed before he retired. He spoke of one of his duties for the twenty odd years he worked for DDT. He preceded DDT into rooms where people were and instructed them to stand when DDT entered. There is obviously a lot of ego that is necessary to rise to the top but DDT was born at the top and is anything but a self made man. He has labored under this need to appear great all his life. He has made his fortune by selling wealth to the rich. He has gone bankrupt at least six times. He doesn’t pay taxes. He is addicted to the spotlight. He is a pathological liar and blowhard. In light of these past few performances, one has to stop and ask if he has a problem. It appears so.

    1. Again not one shred of evidence. Some Texans who may or may not be Republicans equals what in real numbers. Five out of seven dentists polled liked bengay as toothpaste. No sources, no sites. From this FACT as Comrade Issac calls it he builds an ever increasing tower or wev of FACTS all based on the original unproved statement. Comrade Issac is without doubt the worst follower of the left wing white identity extremist secular progressives and either does them no credit or serves to show how silly they are. That is not a fact except Comrade Issac is a huge joke. So let’s second guess the next FACT.

      Issac where are your facts.

      But I gave them


      Didn’t your read?

      Yes but wherres the facts?

      I’m not going to give them aqaing but now I’ve given them twice.

      Either he was poorly trained in Eastern Europe or in California.

      Next we’ll get a source. It will be some publication filled with similar claptrap but still not facts.

      “There That’s Three times.”

      Three is the sacred number of the subjectivists as they think saying it three times is a magic potion or a mystic symbology or something.

      Next will follow previously discussed ‘facts’ that are not facts etc etc.

      Eventually the boredom of witnessing sheer stupidity makes you want to for sure vote against whoever yanking his pud. Which is the true location of the source of his facts.

      That’s all you need to know about leftwing secular regressive extremists and the white movement.

      Ethnically white? You ever see one? I’ve seen caucasians etc. But white means make up?

      Time to powder your nose Isaac.

    2. If DDT means our President, please use DJT, his proper initials. If not, what does DDT mean?

  6. In close situations, courts are inclined to recognize the President’s obligation to protect American citizens.

    A Federal Judge in Brooklyn has initially ruled that those traveling pursuant to a legitimate visa, in the seven targeted middle eastern countries, should not be having to ‘sublet part of a terminal to reside in’ since the issuance of the visa implies that vetting has already occurred.

    Seems like a developing scenario.

    1. Considering the mess the previous administration got that whole system into it’s turning into a good exercise in draining the swamp. Looks like the Court is cooperating with exactly that. Which was the whole purpose of shutting down and re-starting run a full sysems check. And exactly why we hired an outsider instead of an Obumbler clone.

      As it turned out the 100-200 possibly affected will be taken care of in house. The rules left by Kerry’s Side Deals inc will be realigned and made useful and the main purpose of the system restored. Including the outrageous use of religion as a standard by Kerryi and Company. 50,000 muslims to 55 of other religions excepting Kurds whom the FBI continue to say could not be vetted while the claims of this mysterious fast track process still float around fairy tail land?

      I didn’t realize Kerry supported Genocide that much another one of his many sins against the nation.

      But on the bright side this system will be brought back into alignment with Constitutional Law inside of government by ignoring, ignorance and whims..

      Those who voted to trash the RINOs, Gut the Socialists and vote against Hillary and the Regressives made a monumental change in reclaiming our country and our Constitution from the abyss.

      I expect to see more of this type of swamp draining and having the court get rid of the trash is a REAL plus I thought we might get one of those Soros judges but apparently ACLU mis calculated.

      Good job all the way around.

      Whats next on the chopping blocks. Oh yes Making sure the Republicans stay out of bed with the Socialsts and get rid of the RINO perverts – or at least read the hand writing on the wall. Wow if Hillary hadn’t rigged the election in favor of the Socialists Regressives losing…. is their any other explanation?

    2. Again, there is no vetting process. We can trust the vetting we do in cooperation with other developed nations, some countries that may not be so developed, but there simply is no vetting that can be done in most of the third world and hostile nations such as Cuba, North Korea, or Iran. Seriously, China is to be trusted? When I meet an individual from the PRC I generally assume they’re an agent for their government. This was particularly the case when I was stationed in Japan. I’ve run out of memory to recall how many Chinese agents turned out to be posing as students. Particularly young, pretty girls who had a fondness for middle aged men with security clearances.

      The third world is pretty much hopeless when it comes to vetting anyone’s bonafides. Even if we’re dealing with honest brokers the record keeping is shoddy at best, there are a lot of gaps, and it’s not easy to access. For instance, in India there are still village councils of elders that act as judge and jury in many criminal cases. These actions are illegal but they still go on all over rural India. Somebody may have committed rape, and they’ll handle it in house and the government rarely learns about it (there are exceptions; in one recent rape trial a visitor to the village surreptitiously recorded it on his cell phone because they actually punished the victim as harshly as the perp. No, these people weren’t Muslims where that often is the case, they punished the girl because she didn’t report the crime to the village elders, as she was ashamed because her rapist was her own father). I think the Christmas day underwear bomber exemplifies the problem. Although, having had lived in London we could have reliably vetted him for that period. But we even allowed him to travel to the US after his own father went to the embassy and ID’d him as a threat.

      The bottom line is that the only real vetting that can take place in much of he world is done in interviews with consular, embassy, and immigration officials. But we do such a lousy job of training people to ask the right questions that it’s pretty much hopeless. That appears to be the case with Tahseen Malik. Political correctness prevented all these people from asking probing questions that could have prevented her entry into the US (or the Christmas day bomber, and the list goes on). We’re not alone in this; very few nations are good at this. Israel of course, is very good at looking for the bomber, not the bomb. I recall one case where they discovered that someone posing as a non-Muslim British businessman with valid travel documents was really a Muslim convert who intended to blow up an El Al flight right over Tel Aviv. I don’t know how they saw through the facade as it was very good cover and well rehearsed. Some of the Muslim countries are also good at vetting people, as many of them have had lots of practice, and of course being Muslim themselves they are not shy about thoroughly vetting and arresting their coreligionists if they intend to do harm in their countries. Europe is worse than we are. An Arab Christian who is a naturalized German citizen volunteered to work with a German government agency “welcoming” the refugees. She did not volunteer the fact she is a Christian to the refugees as she didn’t think it mattered. It did. They assumed she was Muslim and they talked fairly openly about what they were had done in refugee camps, in their German refugee centers, and what they came to Europe to do. It was not pretty. They were beating any non-Muslims in their refugee centers, forcing them to observe Islamic practices such as fasting during Ramadan, even attempting to force them to convert. None of this was exactly news to the police, as they’ve been forced to separate non-Muslims from Muslims because of the violence. Of course, it was news to the public when she revealed it. They also spoke about the IS members in their midst, and that most of them didn’t come to Europe to work but to live on benefits.

      You simply can’t vet people when you have to use interpreters, and you can’t trust your interpreters. The Muslim interpreters would never reveal this information, particularly not to anyone charged with vetting the refugees. That would be a crime if he helped foreign non-Muslims to the detriment of fellow Muslims. We experienced quite a bit of this shortly after 9/11. We were forced to rely on native speakers to interpret whenever we had people of interest who only spoke Arabic, Urdu, Pashtun, etc. Some, not all but some, were on the side of the person we were interviewing, and actively working against us. They would try to help the interviewee with their story. There are many agencies, some government other NGOs, throughout Europe that have been forced to hire translators and interpreters from among the refugees themselves. Naturally since the vast majority of refugees are Sunni Muslims so are the vast majority of the translators and interpreters. And they bring their grudges and indeed the conflict in their home countries with them. So a Sunni will not help a Shia refugee (let alone a non-Muslim) with their asylum claims. The same goes for their fellow Sunnis at times, as just because someone might be a Syrian Sunni doesn’t mean they don’t have rivalries from among themselves, or rivalries or conflicts with Sunnis from other countries. Of for that matter racial and ethic prejudices, for instance as a Syrian Arab my have against a Syrian Kurd.

      I need to emphasize there is nothing special about the problem of being able to trust you interpreter, as the Niihau incident that began shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor. The Japanese thought the island of Niihau was uninhabited. It is privately owned and has a small native Hawaiian population. Submarine recon could have easily failed to notice as at the time the island was without electricity or telephones, the residents had not vehicles, and conditions were very primitive. As they preferred it. The family that owned it did not allow visitors except by special permission, even for the islanders relatives. The only thing that might have given away the fact that people lived there would have been the weekly boat service that the owners used to transport the rare visitors, any mail or supplies, and themselves as they didn’t live on the island but made short, weekly visits.

      There were three non-Hawaiians who lived on the island. All three were of Japanese descent. One had married a Hawaiian islander. He had been born in Japan but had a long term resident of the US. Then there was a married couple, both of whom had been born in Hawaii. When a Japanese fighter pilot whose Zero had been shot up during the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7th landed in a field on Niihau. The islanders didn’t know about the attack, but did read the weekly supply of newspapers and knew that relations between the US and Japan were awful. And that was a Japanese warplane in that field. The pilot was dazed by his hard landing, so one of the Hawaiians confiscated his pistol and his papers just to be on the safe side and before they pilot could come to his senses.

      The bottom line is all three of their Japanese neighbors went over to the pilots side almost immediately. The pilot told them about the attack, but they didn’t tell their Hawaiian neighbors. The Hawaiians liked and thought they could trust them but they could tell they were not telling them the truth about what the pilot told them. They’re behavior made them very suspicious. It was only later that night when they listened to a battery powered radio that they learned the truth. They were shocked that their neighbors would like to them, but they had to face the truth.

      The Niihau incident had many repercussions, but among them was that all the forces operating in the Pacific Theater decided that they could not use anyone of Japanese descent as interpreters or translators. It may be unfair, as Hawaiian nisei did fight with distinction in Italy, but it also wasn’t due entirely to racial prejudice. American citizens were serving in every single Axis armed force, and the Americans knew it. There were more than a few American citizens cough in Japan visiting relatives and at school when the war suddenly broke out. Tokyo Rose is a prime example, but many such individuals served in the Navy, and the Japanese Navy used them as communications officers so they could monitor US and allied comms for whatever intel they could pick up. It wasn’t until very close to the end of the Pacific war that US forces enlisted Nisei to try and convince the Japanese to surrender. But primarily US forces relied on their small cadre of trained Japanese Language Officers (the Navy had been sending both Navy and Marine officers to Tokyo to learn the language for 30 years when the war broke out) as interpreters and translators until a new influx of non-Japanese JLOs began graduating from their hastily assembled Japanese language schools.

  7. So, now the terrorists will wear a cross around their necks, visible but not bling, proclaim the Christian faith, and be welcomed with open arms. The real problem with DDT is he’s simply stupid. That’s the spooky part.

    1. Bight ME. it’s a town on the NE Coast. Looking in the mirror again Comrade? Must be hard with Carville on vacation. Speakinig of spooky hows the white identify movement going over there on the extreme left?

    2. It’s a danger, IS and other terrorists would certainly try to pull it off. But it wouldn’t be as easy as wearing a cross and shaving your beard, and groups like ISIS know it. In fact they tell their brothers not to try if the name on their travel documents doesn’t support the ruse.

      You could do it if you had knowledgeable people asking the right questions. By now we have a pretty good handle on who the Christian Syrian refugees are. They tend to have fled in large groups and as much as possible stuck together. Even if we haven’t been much help to the Syrian Christian refugees, a lot of aid groups have been helping them for years. They have lists of refugees going back to 2011 when the Syrian civil war broke out. If the terrorists tried to stick an imposter in with them they wouldn’t be too hard to ferret out. Again, you’d have to ask the right questions; his hometown, what denomination was he, what church did he attend. Somebody among the refugees would know if he was for real or play acting. As would anyone knowledgeable about Christianity in general and his particular denomination or sect in particular. Simply shaving and putting on a cross doesn’t turn anyone into a Christian. Christians in the west don’t take their religion seriously for the most part, but they do in Syria because their religion is what defines them as individuals and as a community. Someone who is knowledgeable would know inside of five questions whether or not a man is truly a Christian or is faking it.

      The problem is we don’t have knowledgeable people anymore. I doubt anyone would know the difference between a Muslim and a non-Muslim name. And they certainly wouldn’t know to ask the right questions. It’s our vetting, as well as the UN’s and Europeans, that I don’t trust and it can’t be fixed during a 90 day hiatus in immigration. And I wouldn’t trust the Catholic Church either; an arch-Bishop convicted in Israel of smuggling arms from Istrael to Fatah in the West Bank died recently. In the Vatican. The Church was sheltering him, preventing his extradition and imprisonment. if they’d help smuggle arms to terrorists, and despite the arch-Bishop’s dishonesty no one forced him to smuggle arms and certainly no one force the Vatican to protect him, why not help smuggle the terrorists themselves.

      No doubt there are tens of thousands of Syrian refugees (Yazidi and Christian) who could be safely brought in. But those would be the ones already vetted by these aid societies and known to their own communities, local religious leaders, and families. To be extra safe, we could bring in entire extended families, and in some case entire communities. You could never slip in a ringer. But the fact remains WE can’t vet them. And I don’t see us acquiring the ability anytime soon.

      1. That same applied to the Catholic Priests in South America during the revoltions of the 60’s plus and it still goes on today. People forget in the USA or probably were never taught but people in other countries do not forget The absolute most asinine thing i’ve seen lately is people talking about moving to and investing in Zimbabwe. The President for life is pushing the notion. Why? No left to rob. But a nice set of carefully selected photos and a few Madison Avenue sentences later invest and live in Zimbabwe was in the works. No one taught those ready to sign up on the basis of a flashy magazine ad and they had no idea about the realities of Zimbabwe. Nor most other places.

        While the press babbles about the unrest in Mexico one million US citizens live peacefully and safely for six to 12 months a year with a death by weapons rate less than any in the USA. I’ll restate that. The death rate by shooting of US AND Canadian expatats and full to part time people is less than any death rate by weapons in the USA. Most that do happen ltake place within 50 miles of the border or are related to drugs deals gone bad.

        Name a better place to live? With a better standard of living and cost of living? No way i’m telling that I don’t want it ruined. But I’m within eight hours of the USA/USM border.

        Most Latinos going north learn some English except those from other countries transiting from further south but gringos going south? Forget it. We bi linguals are about 50%

        Most Mexican high school students graduate with more education than any USA public school and only go half a day. while those that finish university or tech school preparation learn English as part of the mandatory curriculum. A pre university student knows advacned math speaks two languages and our literate, can discuss classic literature, world affairs and philosophy, and understands methods of learning better than most USA high school teachers. All they lack is practice in conversational and some experience.
        They are a fine addition to our country if we are lucky enough to get them. They attend school half a day for ten months or so of the year and often work the other half when older.

        i can’t say the same in reverse without administering an examination..

        To get a university degree as a teacher requires something called a licenciado. or licensed to do business or work in the field. That applies from the trade schools and technical schools to through all levels.

        But getting back to the subject some parts of the culture want to keep firm control of the population and will work with any system that provides exactly that. Mexico and some fo the Cono Sur countries escaped that by driving the Church out of Mexico. They are still Catholic primarily but it has little or no bearing on the rest of their secular life as opposed to some of the other countries that did not take that step.

        They also have a robust political system with seven plus parties. Good, bad, better, worse, it’s their country and we are the guests. But until this year it was hard to demonstrate the democratic/consitutional republic system when my own country was going in the opposite direction.

        Mexico is uneasy but they are also practical of the worst happens they have less distance to fall and less distance to climb back up.

        Can you live on three tacos or burritos a day and make them from scratch? With no welfare cushion?

        By the way medicine is 40% of the cost in the USA and paying out of pocket is the cheapest way to obtain quality medical care for me. The locals get a better rate and ambulance service is no charge and run by donations and local groups supporting it. Can your community match that?

        One million of us have found out there is a better place and it’s only a short distance away.

        So why so many illegals? For one at one point the border was wide open and jobs were plentiful. No longer the case. Now a good many are from El Salvador or on down further south to Panama. Mexicans found out it’s too expensive too go to a country with no job opportunities.

        That I hope will change. i’m a Constitutional Centrist and a moderate compared to some BUT my dream is vecinos distante no mas.

  8. Of course it’s legal, although allowing Christian Syrians to selectively slip through might not be.
    But I have a serious concern with this Executive Order: Why isn’t Saudi Arabia on it?
    And I have a mild concern with it: Why aren’t Pakistan and Afghanistan on it?

    1. I agree — the Orlando shooter’s parents are Afghani, San Bernadino – both Pakis, and Boston Marathon bros were from Chechnya.

      SA is our “ally” – we sell them lots of expensive weapons so no surprise they are not on the list.

      We need to start monitoring mosques where homegrown terrorism is encouraged.

      But those who have been vetted and have green cards should be allowed back in IMO

      1. Autumn,
        The San Bernadino wife went though the vetting process.
        I think she traveled back and forth from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia.
        There were evidently no red flags uncovered in the vetting process specifically related to her history of travel.
        However, her online commitment to violent jihad, and her desire to participate in violent jihad, were “out there in plain sight” if those involved in the vetting process had bothered to check.
        The vetting and monitoring process seems to mostly work…except when it doesn’t.
        I don’t know if the failures of vetting in the case of the San Bernadino terrorist wife resulted in any systemic changes to the vetting process.
        Also, I haven’t seen specifics of the “extreme vetting” Trump has promised to implement.
        But failures of the vetting system and / or monitoring system here and abroad got us to this point of slamming the door shut… least temporarily….on immigration from specific countries.
        I think the Trump administration will ultimately have to convince Americans that the “vetting/ monitoring” system has actually been tightened/revamped to prevent recurrances of previous failures.
        If Trump fails to deliver, then we’ll know the true worth of promise to improve the vetting system.

        1. “The vetting and monitoring process seems to mostly work…except when it doesn’t.”


          What’s a dirty bomb or two among friends? A few thousand innocent Americans seems a fair price for the Left to feel good about themselves. Compassion is as savage a tyrant as avarice.

          1. A dirty bomb is more probable than a suit case variety which leaves out the neutron types. Dirty Bombs are any kind of explosives wrapped with any kind of radioactive material which of course does not include inert uranium since it’s natural shelf life has expired. It does include all that waste piling up all over the place with the closing of the Nevada facility. Thank you very much Green Movement you just made off the shelf home made nuclear devices possible the same way you did the Oklahoma City Bomb Instructions.

            The practical side of Mespo’s comment with it’s I’M SURE unintended consequences from the land of stupidity.

            Predicting the resposne Are you really sure? Being a product of the new theory of education Of course I watched the Vinnie movie and can say two yoots and everything. Teacher gave me a social promotion and the gummint gave me collidge monies.

            1. So you want to be reactive(pardon the pun) as opposed to pro-active? People like you get innocent people killed. You can’t protect someone after they are dead.

              1. Took the words right out of my mouth, Will. I always love the “barn door” horse herders. Wonder if he locks his doors at night even though he’s yet to be murdered!

                1. Yup, good analogy. Once the horse is out of the barn it’s too late to close the door. I’m sure he locks his doors, I mean with people like us running around you never know what might happen! LOL!

                  1. Moot point by the time anyone gets around to doing anything except burning up immigrants cars it will be over and something for the history books. Snowflakes all melted.

      2. We need to do more than that. As a tiny first step we need to follow the example of many Muslim majority countries and declare the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) a foreign terrorist organization. We need to to follow the UAE’s example and declare CAIR a foreign terrorist organization as well.

        A great many facts were established at the Holy Land Foundation terror funding trial in 2008/2009, Three of the most interesting documents presented as evidence can be found here.

        They include an explanatory memorandum on the MB’s strategic goals in North America, the list of co-conspirators, and the judges ruling confirming that the government had amply proven that CAIR (as well as several other organizations that had argued their names should be stricken from all public records) belonged on that list, and had amply proven their links to Hamas.

        A short history of the MB. It exists for one reason only: to wage jihad against the West until it has been subjugated and brought under Islamic rule. A lot of Muslims and their leftist apologists try to give the impression that the only reason Muslims because terrorists is because of US foreign policy, the Israeli “occupation,” the Crusades, or some other form of Western oppression. This is a scam. Islam is an oppressive religion, not an oppressed one. It’s impossible to maintain the scam when you look at Islamic history in other regions of the world that had no connection to the West at the time.

        There was one pivotal event that prompted Hassan al-Banna to create the MB in 1928. That was when Kemal Ataturk disestablished the Caliphate four years earlier as a step to secularize Turkey. This infuriated al-Banna because only the Caliph can lawfully declare offensive jihad. The use of military force to subjugate the West. This is why terrorist groups like Al Qaeda have to make up various pretexts to make they attack appear defensive measures in the eyes of of Muslims. That way they’re not usurping what is the prerogative that is the Caliph’s alone.

        The MB has never abandoned the goals of reestablishing the Caliphate and of destroying the West. You can read about it in the strategic memorandum at the link.

        ”Enablement of Islam in North America, meaning: establishing an effective and a stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood which adopts Muslims’ causes domestically and globally, and which works to expand the observant Muslim base, aims at unifying and directing Muslims’ efforts, presents Islam as a civilization alternative, and supports the global Islamic State wherever it is…

        The process of settlement is a ‘Civilization-Jihadist Process’ with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers…”

        The MB has never eschewed violence in general, or terrorism in particular. It tries to work as a subversive force within the system whenever it can or must, but Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt show exactly how they intend to exercise power whenever they have amassed enough of it (recall ho proud the MB in Egypt was of their torture chambers; they couldn’t wait to show them off to the foreign press).

        An additional step would be to tear a page out of MacArthur’s playbook when he governed Japan. Most people know that as a condition of remaining emperor Hirohito had to renounce his divinity. But MacArthur went further and banned Shinto from playing any role in public life. It could not play a role in government or be included in school curriculum. Despite the first amendment ban on establishing a religion, we have gone down that road quite a bit with Islam. Too far.

        When religious groups sent Bibles to soldiers in Afghanistan you know what the USG did? Burn them. But try burning a Quran and the USG becomes apoplectic. The Quran is the only religious text we treat with this level of reverence as official policy. It’s insanity. The guards at GITMO an not dare handle a prisoner’s Quran with bare hands. They have to wear gloves. So, we treat the core text of the terrorists’ motivating ideology with respect. It is official US policy to agree with the very book that tells them that not only may the kill the unbelievers, but that the Kuffar are unclean.

        The Quran is the source of many of the rules and regulations for operation of GITMO. For instance, since the Quran supposedly prohibits physical contact between men and women unless they’re married or closely related, judges have barred female guards from being any part of the escort teams when moving prisoners. So screw US laws and regulations, we’ll just use the Quran. In other words, creeping Sharia.

        Britain is a few years ahead of us. They recognize the rulings of Sharia courts. Muslims are pushing for the same thing here. We can not allow any of it. The example of Britain and other western countries where Sharia courts operate is that despite their jurisdiction being limited to family matters such as divorce, inevitably they exceed those limits and get into criminal matters such as beating a wife or child. Again I’ll probably be accused of the non existent (outside of politics) disease of Islamophobia but this is precisely what Muslim women’s organizations predicted would happen. In fact Muslim women’s groups have successfully fought against establishing legal recognition of Sharia courts in other western countries precisely because of this.

        A useful third step would be to reverse the effects of the disaster that resulted from the “October massacre” of 2011. This barely made a ripple in the press, but if you had any connection with the intelligence community, the national security apparatus, foreign policy, or federal law enforcement it was Titanic. In all senses of the word. In what was clearly a move that had been coordinated ahead of time with the Obama administration, a group of dozens of representatives from various Muslim organizations (most of whom you’d be familiar with from the list of co-conspirators and co-venturers listed in MB documents presented at the trial, such as the strategic memorandum) sent a letter to then National Security Adviser demanding that the government fire (cancel their contracts) all “Islamophic” outside training consultants, reeducate or replace government employees who provide training deemed unacceptable and Islamophobic by these groups, and reeducate everyone who received their training.

        Brennan, who had plenty of his own stationary, wrote back immediately on the presidents WH stationary agreeing to all their demands. And just as immediately new training guidelines, which had already been written, when out to the various agencies and departments implementing the new policy. From then on all the trainers had to be approved by what were essentially the unindicted coconspirators from the HLF terror funding trial. If not actually provided by these groups. I am convinced of the latter, as the FBI and CIA will not tell Congress in open session who their trainers are. I suspect because people like me know who they are; we used to have to watch them. Now they’re on the inside.

        The FBI testified at the HLF terror funding trial in Dallas that CAIR is a Hamas front group.

        The FBI also testified to the same facts at a Virginia terror trial, and as recently as 2010 the were providing members of Congress being lobbied by CAIR with the evidence justifying naming CAIR as an unidicted coconspirator. While the five defendants contested some of the evidence at the HLF terror trial, they never even disputed much of it. Including the MB’s strategic memorandum. This has become important again as Ted Cruz’s bill to classify the MB as a terrorist organization relied on the evidence presented in the two trials, that the defendants could not dispute, that the courts accepted, and indeed that the judges relied on and quoted from in their rulings (again, at the first link you can read Judge Jorge Solis’ ruling denying CAIR’s petition to strike their name from all public documents in which quotes from the government’s exhibit). So now Hamas front group CAIR has embarked on a media smear campaign saying that Cruz is relying on “discredited” evidence. It was never discredited. The defendants couldn’t discredit the evidence when it counted, when it convicted them. CAIR was discredited, or should have been. But not the evidence that damns them. That doesn’t make a difference to their media allies. Indeed, the Huffpo recently ran a story taking this group of liars word for it, and incredibly never once mentioned the HLF terror funding trial in their story that Cruz is using discredited evidence.

        A little background on CAIR might be in order. It was created after men who were on trial in the HLF terror funding case had a conference call with representatives of Hamas. Hamas wanted to create a new organization that could pass itself off as more secular that would promote their interests. CAIR was the only organization these men created after Hamas asked them to do so. As Judge Solis ruled, the government provided ample evidence to prove CAIR’s links to Hamas.

        We had more evidence following the trial. CAIR had been discredited, at least for a while. They lost most of their US membership. Yet nothing happened to their revenue streams. Obviously because they don’t rely on their US membership for their funding, but are funded from abroad.

        The men who founded CAIR were closely associated with what was known as the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP). LIke the HLF, the IAP no longer exists. A federal judge in a 2005 civil case found that the IAP and HLF had both provided material support to Hamas, specifically in the murder of dual national Israeli American teenager in the West Bank. The IAP’s assets were frozen and the group was disbanded. So the new organization founded by other associates of the IAP, CAIR, simply took over the IAP’s role as Hamas’ propaganda arm and recruiter in the US.

        I don’t see why we put up with this. The MB is allowed to operate in the US in a bewildering array of guises. There were approximately 300 unindicted coconspirators. They’re all affiliated, yet when one gets caught in the terrorism cookie jar the others pretend they have nothing to do with that implicated group. They do so even when they’re sharing the same office. It’s unbelievable. I can only conclude these groups have been protected, mostly by Democrats as they get out the Muslim vote for them. There are some stupid Republicans who protect them, too, such as McCain and Graham, but it’s primarily their value to the Democrats.

        I’ve never seen an administration so heavily infiltrated by MB associates as the Obama administration. The highest profile associate is Huma Abedin. There’s no way I could have gotten a security clearance if I had as many ties to shady characters and organizations. And no, this isn’t “guilt by association.” If I had family members who were made members of the mob, my dad founded an institute whose main business is to publish a journal, and both the institute and journal were funded by someone also financing the Irish Republican Army, and I had worked for that financier on the editorial staff of that journal, and by the way I had been and still was a member of front groups for Sinn Fein, I never would have gotten a clearance.

        Yet Abedin’s pedigree is even worse. Her father founded the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs in partnership with wealth Saudi academic, onetime secretary-general of the joint Saudi/MB venture the Muslim World League, and terror financier Abdullah Omar Naseef. Actually he recruited both of Abedin’s parents. Abedin’s mom is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood, the lady’s auxiliary of the MB, has published what can only be described as MB propaganda in her own right, and is still involved in running the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. Abedin joined the family business and for years was on the editorial staff of the English language edition.

        I’ve mentioned elsewhere that the IMMA can best be described as the foreign policy wing of the Saudi Ministry of Religious Affais. There is documentary proof that this ministry started the IMMA through Naseef at the behest of the king of Saudi Arabia himself. They chose the name of the organization carefully, as it reflect the Saudis strategy. Muslim minorities in the west are to be discouraged from assimilating. Rather in every possible way they are to be encouraged to remain separate from the host country’s population, distinct, and in fact hostile to it. They are to be influenced to live in Islamic enclaves where they can practice Islamic supremacism, demand the right to practice Sharia law in those enclaves, and then later demand that the wider society begin to adopt Sharia legal principles.

        We see this in more advanced stages in Europe what with many countries having no-go, Sharia enforcement zones and even Sharia courts. But it is happening here, and if you read the MB’s strategic goals in their explanatory memorandum you’ll see it is their plan as well (despite appearances the Saudis and the MB have several joint ventures). Of course you’ll be called an Islamophobe and a paranoid conspiracy theorist if you read the evidence presented and accepted at trial because the defendants couldn’t dispute its validity, so now all they have is name calling and smears left.

        And Abedin also has MB ties of its own. The evidence at the terror trials established that the Muslim Student Association is the first MB front group it created in the US. Huma Abedin was on the executive board of the Muslim Students Association at George Washington University in Washington for years. She was on the executive board in 2001 when its chaplain was Anwar al Awlaki. At the time al Awlaki was ministering not only to Huma Abedin and her fellow board members, he was also ministering to 9/11 hijackers.

        This is troubling stuff. It’s important to note that the Hillary Clinton administration would have been even worse. Not just because of Huma Abedin. Did you know the form Cairo director of the Clinton foundation, Gehad el-Haddad, is serving life in prison for his role in Morsi’s MB administration

        These people are why there is not vetting of anyone, let alone Syrian refugees. To get so many MB members this close to people on power you have to select for associations and work history that in saner times meant you were a security risk. So now the wolves are in the sheep pen; the guard dogs have been fired or neutered. If you read the MB’s strategic memo. if you’re familiar with the IMMI’s purpose and goal (and by extension the Saudis), if you read CIA contractor James Mitchell’s new book, Enhanced Interrogation (or just the excerpts published last year in the Washington Post) you’ll see all these entities have the same plan. And why wouldn’t they; they all work together to a great degree. With the very people we need to keep out training our security, law enforcement, and intel apparatus, we’ll get more Tahseen Maliks or Tsarnaevs. They didn’t fall through any cracks. There’s nothing there to crack. The vetting process doesn’t exist. The Tsarnaevs were especially egregious. Whatever you may think of the Russians, they did provide good intel on the older brother. But by 2013 when they set off their bombs, federal law enforcement had been programmed to ignore exactly that kind of information. When the Russians told the FBI that the older brother had gone to Chechnya to train in jihad, the FBI agents probably thought “Oh, good for him, he went to train in the internal spiritual struggle against unholy desires and thoughts, what a good guy he must be.” Because that’s what the MB provided/approved trainers are teaching them about jihad.

        Of course despite their best efforts at reeducating FBI agents, there are a lot of them that know better. Either because of their previous training or because of self-study they would have recognized a very dangerous pattern. Not only did he travel to a foreign war zone where terrorists operate, had had suddenly become very religious. The older brother had been something of a partier, but he stopped that and became something of a Quran thumper. But you see, the MB provided/approved trainers are trying pound it into their heads that since Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, the fact that somebody becomes a more fervent Muslim must be ignored. It’s not the only indicator of sudden jihad syndrome, but it’s one of them. In saner times they would have kept these guys under surveillance. But they couldn’t; even the guys who knew better knew that they’d be severely reprimanded if not fired if they the only sane thing. As KSM told his interrrogator, “Your leaders will turn on you.” They have turned on us. Perhaps Trump can return some sanity to the system. But right now it’s discriminating in favor of the security risks and against those who are perfectly safe.

        Professor Turley believes there may be some Constitutional issue if we favor Christians and Yazidis. I don’t see how as persecuted religious minorities have been going to the head of the refugee line for over a quarter of a century. In one of the few good things Frank Lautenberg ever did in Congress, he sponsored and helped pass what became known as the Lautenberg Amendment. It was originally aimed at assisting Jewish refugees from the Soviet Union. It also had to be reauthorized annually. It had been since GHWB through Obama. Obama not only reauthorized it he expanded its protections to a few other persecuted minorities such as Bahais (it had been expanded far beyond merely protecting Soviet Jews long ago). It no longer needs to be reauthorized annually; discriminating in favor of persecuted religious minorities is now a permanent part of our immigration and refugee laws. It’s not exclusive against other refugees who may have other bases to claim refugees status, but favoring some refugees because of their religion is one of them, has been for going on three decades, and if it were a problem I’m certain we’d have found out by now.

        Sunnis are not persecuted for their religion in IS controlled areas; they also aren’t a minority. One can argue the Shia are. Certainly Christians are. When IS takes over a town they identify the Christians and paint the Arabic consonent “nun” (for Nazarene, what Muslims call Christians) on their houses. Christians must then bay a tax called jizya on their wealth, it’s more crippling the better off they are, but it’s so crippling that until the West for the Ottoman empire to eliminate the dhimma or third class status for non-Muslims poor Christians and Jews (and eventually the jizya would impoverish all non-Muslims) had to sell their children into slavery to pay it. IS also requires Christians (there are almost no Jews left in Syria or Iraq) to carry with them proof that they have paid the jizya or they’ll have to either pay it again for the “privilege” of being subjects of the Islamic State, or they will be killed. Christians also can’t hold any position of power or authority over Muslims. They can’t even do so in their own businesses, if they have them. The Yazidis have it even worse. They aren’t given the choice of paying the jizya as they’re considered pagans and even devil worshipers. So it’s convert, get killed, or run for their lives. I’m not sure what percentage of the conquered Syrian population was Yazidi, but they number .018% of the refugees Obama has allowed in. Before the civil war broke out in Syria, Christians made up 10% of the population, but only .03% of the refugees.

        Obama’s refugee policy actively discriminated against Christians,Yazidis, and other smaller sects. Obama requires all refugees go through the UN vetting process at UN camps. This is worse than a bad joke. Those camps are still IS controlled territory. Religious minorities well be persecuted if not killed or kidnapped and soled into slavery if they try to stay in those camps for the 18 months minimum to go through the UN vetting processs. These camps tend to be in remote areas, so it is impossible for refugees fleeing with little more than the clothes they’re wearing to commute to and from the camps to a place that is safe for them. Even if they could survive the camps, they’re refugee claims would certainly fail almost all the time. Why? Because IS controls them. As we are seeing in Europe, Muslims provide the vast majority of the translators and interpreters to the refugee agencies and bureaus. In the camps all the translators and interpreters. They simply mistranslate and misinterpret any documents these non-Muslim refugees have and whatever they say. If this is happening in Europe where IS (hopefully) does not control the entire process it would be guaranteed to happen in the camps. But it doesn’t need to as fear and intimidation drive away the minorities before they get that far.

        Since these problems are well know by many international aid groups and have brought them to the attention of US/UK/and European authorities, and for years they have done absolutely nothing about it, I can only conclude they’re deliberately discriminating against religious minorities.

        Finally, the harsh reality is there is not way to vet these people at all. There’s no system to vet them against. Even if Syria weren’t in the middle of a civil war, we couldn’t trust whatever information the Syrian government would provide us. They would love to terrorists or their own agents into this country; if we were favoring Christians and Yazidi refugees, they’d give these people new identities as Christians and Yazidis. IS is doing the same thing. We’ve captured documents in which they advise “the brothers” trying to get into the US and Europe as refugees to wear crosses, shave their beards, and never go near a mosque if they have travel documents that can support the deception.

        Hopefully the Trump administration will arrive at the some conclusion and the ban on refugees from at least some of these countries becomes permanent. Besides if you really want to help the actual refugees you can help twelve there for one brought here.

    2. Is it possible that they have reliable systems in place with regard to their citizenry? And that our country feels comfortable relying on their records? 9/11 was over 15 years ago, and Saudi Arabia certainly isnt a “failed state” like these seven…..

      1. Good point and to interject the Press Conference for this morning addressed that point. ALL nation and the policies of this country as regards passports, visas, immigration and the like will be reviewed – in turn. The one’s deemed most critical by the Obama Regime listed these seven and those in the State Department were asked for their opinion or input.

        300,000 plus entered the country in the 24 hour period when this started. 107 were detained for further vetting ALL of them have entered with only a delay and some less than that caused by TSA. If the airlines haven’t got the message by now they will have to pay for the return flight. On those temporarily blocked.

        Secondly to get the visa those folks did a process with the US State Department officials in the various countries. Perfectly capable of sending additional information. Email is faster than a speeding jet.

        The curiously prepared supposedly spontaneous demonstrations involved more time and effort than that needed to speedily clear entry.

        The only thing faster was Shumers play pretend. play acting but then he’s had years of experience .

        So the latest. is ALL countries will in turn be examined incuding the whole process and more to the point closer to home.

        Check out the Iranians missile launch and new nuclear program which can produce weapons grade devices, check out the mosque in Canada shot up by an Islamic and check the order of dealing with my friends down here in Mexico. Right Johnny on the spot.

        CRIMINALs and we know this because state and local arrested them for a criminal act and those found to have had a criminal record who are also undocumented will be jailed or deported no matter which of the many countries use the USA/USM border as a means of entry.

        Locals will not need to justify why their own citizens are being arrested and jailed while they ask that illegals who were arrested as Criminals are given a free ride.

        The remaining undocumented aliens starting with the dream act are now slated not to be deported last I read and ways are being examined to put the otheres in some kind of a program that is not a simple catch and release joke.l Green Card? Bracero whatever.

        The illegal employers are going to be examined closely and ways to bring in peope legally put in place.

        Now for those who want to do something other than get we Constitutionalists more votes did you know about the sponsorship program? Are you willing to take that step and that responsibility?

        If the answer is NO then Bight ME is my address.

    1. IMHO, possibly, under a very expansive reading of the statute. However, the way I read the Ex. Order, it is a temporary thing until better procedures are worked out. So, I don’t look for it to be overturned. However, the Democrats will never pass up a chance to hop on their soapbox and race-bait.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

    2. I’m no attorney either but fought crime from a squad car in a pretty active city. I think JT would best have the answer to the question. I do hope the ban stays in place until a time those seeking entry can be fully vetted for safety of the entire nation. JT wouldn’t Plenary Power or Plenary authority give President Trump and/or congress the right to enforce this law without interference from the courts?

      I’m not against immigration from anyone wishing to enter the U.S. providing its in accordance with our laws. My parents and many of the family came to the U.S. legally and sat in Ellis Island until they were approved for entry. My mom told me that while waiting for approval many were rejected and sent back to their place of origin. They could have been rejected for a number of reasons, health, political, criminal acts. Both parents are gone now but I can tell you they were not in favor of illegal immigration. This is a can that politicians from both sides have been kicking down the road far to long. The first step for the unnecessary “comprehensive reform” to immigration should be complete enforcement. Just think if complete enforcement had been the order of the day immigration would not be the discussion of the day.

      I know there are far to many on this blog who hate President Trump but at least he has the courage to address the issues and favor the American Citizens. He will never get your approval but I think he will do quite well and much better then Obama or Clinton. The dems have been taken over by far left radicals and Marxist, they are falling farther and farther down a rat hole, and as a result they will continue to lose elections.

      1. Another Constitutional Republic supporter in what I call the moderate center of the country. Good post! And a very fair and polite description of the dark side. Besides my 24 years in the infantry and related units did three years as a police officer. Stay safe.

        1. Welcome home brother ’66’-’67’ University of South Vietnam – Dong Ha campus, majored M-79 theory of trajectory.

    3. I am a lawyer, and while I’m no Jonathan Turley, I think the recitation of the precedent of things like the Chines Exclusion Acts misses the point. I’d be astonished if any court cited them today to uphold Trump’s actions. I think the analysis in your link (from the not remotely liberal Cato Institute) is more likely correct.

      1. The lead and advantage Trump has is a demonstrated willingness to clean up the mess AND accept help from the courts as they make decisions. The whole point is to bring the system in order as it goes through the various phases of which this is just one.

        Also if you are thinking the Cato Institute can not be anything but conservative whatever you must have missed they are no longer part of the objectivist community although still using some of techniques for one thing and some of their studies definitely supported questions of importance to people across the spectrum for the instance the study on instances of police misconduct in which the carried the ball for everyone while Clinton, Bush, and Obama dropped and delayed it – and then there is the party platform and those two candidates who were nothing but liberal or at least the same distance left of center as are RINOs. Since the divested Reason it has lost any under new management.

        As a practicing objectivist though I would say they are far more than most capable of judging what is too far out of whack in any control system but were unable to more than state it which is not the same as changing it. And of course along with Klein they helped keep Hillary below the reqired federal level of a majority in both the popular and the electoral vote.One that didn’t count and one that did.

        What most of you keep missing is the coalition that won included groups that are still not recognized by the pollsters and the media and both the shattered Democrats and the Republicans. Rinos to Dinos.

        Lawyer or not you are not looking at the reality of what was and still is a counter revolution against progressivism and it’s still on going.

        Trumps advantage started two years ago and grew especially the willingness to ask for advice and consent from the citizens. how many polls or surveys did Clinton and the DNC run asking what is important to you citizens, how important, in what way, what do you want to see accomplished.

        His advantage continues precisely because he continues that learning curve while others think it doesn’t exist. That’s fine denial is a fine way of attracting converts.

        In any case we’re working on 2017 and have two grassroots organizations using the principles of representative democracy while the points that attracted votes and new voters are accomplishing change and continue to attract more support.

        Meanwhile the left is splintered and the Rinos have we hope been disciplined. If they don’t cooperate they will not get the same support next time. There will be no Hillary to take out as a first mission object and the DNC may not be restablished for a decade or so – depends on their new management.

        But here in the center we mild mannered supporters of the Constitution the center of our Constitutional Republic based on foundation of representative democracy are doing just fine and of course those converts include the Independent Democratic Coalition anyway IDC. How long before that starts happening at the federal level. One of our other survey ideas that is already thought out.

        Nice thing about the Constitution is any reasonably educated and literate citizen has no trouble understanding it and the decency to uphold our social contract….

        and that’s a fact jack.

        Takes a leader with and this outsider has big brass ones not golf balls and I reckon your putters arent big enough either.

        What you call a direct challenge? No. but it’s an invitation to become a citizen of the United States of America.

        PS we didn’t get the Libertarian candidates but we welcomed the assistance of the Libertarians and after all wasn’t that the purpose?

        Be nice to the Professor …. he runs a good blog and it’s respected by all except maybe the regressive extremists but no one is banned or shunned. Just held to a higher standard than they are used to being prepared to combat.

  9. Even more concerning.

    “It’s always more important in the news cycles we have today to pay attention to what Trump is doing more than what he’s saying.

    So this one ought to be one that gets the attention of everyone. The former editor of Breitbart News, Steve Bannon, is now a permanent member of the National Security Council by executive decree.

    From the order:

    The PC shall have as its regular attendees the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, the Assistant to the President and Chief Strategist, the National Security Advisor, and the Homeland Security Advisor. The Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall attend where issues pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed. The Counsel to the President, the Deputy Counsel to the President for National Security Affairs, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget may attend all PC meetings.

    So Reince Preibus and Steve Bannon are permanent members, but the Director of National Intelligence and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, not so much.

    On what planet would there be business before the National Security Council’s Principal’s Committee that would NOT concern the DNI or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff?

    Is THIS how they are rebuilding and respecting the military? By excluding them from national security decisions so a political hack and a Nazi sympathizer can take their place?

    We’re heading for a terrible place.

    1. I’ve been careful not to get too worked up about assorted happenings over the past week. There has been much bad reporting and a whole lot of Chicken Little that really is nothing more than liberals being angry they aren’t still in charge. But this NSC change up has me seriously concerned. I think it is the biggest development so far and it is getting little attention.

    2. I kinda thought you would like the idea of a couple fo the left wing being included. They may not have all the political hacks but they are the home of National Socialst sympathizers in their white identity secular regressive wing. come to think of it since they incude RINOs add political hacks back in the mix.

    1. As of a few minutes ago on Feb 3rd One individual a certain Judge Robertson has taken it upon himself to be resonsible for whatever happens next. Another good reason to fill the 9th Circuit with something besides left wing Soristas. As I recall he gets to name four new members? Maybe it was five.

      But on the bright side this highlights the entire system and puts the focus where it should be. Does the system work or does it not work and does it work within the law and the Constitution or does it work only by the whims of one individual .Be tthat individudal a Judge, President, Member of Congress or someone like George Soros and his ACLU. Someone should ask them how are you going to have liberties if you are dead? Where did I get that idea. Right out of the handbook for secular regressive activists.

      One way or other it’s part of the swamp draining process and the bright lights are now focused on One Judge in Seattle, Washington. Just ait back and see what effect this has and hope

      Just few months ago an order like this would have rated lttle notice but then an order like this would never have been given as the former President didn’t give a rat’s ass about the safety of the citizens.

      In the meantime the borders are once again open to whomever and whatever. It may not be pretty but it sure is ugly when you ask where was this Judge when the floodgates were opened to terrorist incursions? Where was the Judge when our civil rights were changed from ‘probable cause and due process’ to ‘arrest on ‘mere suspicion?

Comments are closed.