Holy fuck you are delusional and a homo. Yeah, keep blaming President Obama.

President Dipshit let Richard Spencer's college bestie Stephen Miller write the last two travel bans.

 

I have a feeling President Obama gives two shits about President Dipshit. SMH.

 

No twitters so far. The handlers must have taken his phone off of him. I see another court has slapped this EO down. I love America, the humour just akeeps acomming.

 

CBS News:


Obama No Longer A Candidate, But Still Campaigning

2/9/09
-----


Obama's Travel Itinerary Mixes Policy, Electoral Politics


6/21/09

First, a quiz. How many people attended President Obama's town-hall forum in Vermont?

That would be none. Since becoming president, he hasn't set foot in a state he won by nearly 40 percentage points in November's general election.

But thousands have heard Obama speak in Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri, Indiana and Florida, all among the 16 states he has visited since taking office. In each of those places, his margin of victory or defeat last November was fewer than five percentage points.

As recently as last week, Obama warned that the changes he is seeking in health care, energy policy and financial regulation require "taking on the status quo in Washington." And that, he told an audience of donors who paid as much as $30,400 a couple to see him, "requires the courage to look . . . beyond the next election."

Yet during his first five months in office, public policy and electoral politics have come together seamlessly in his domestic travel itinerary. On nearly every trip he has taken, Obama has followed the timeworn path of presidential travel -- go where the votes matter most.
--------------


Barack Obama must stop campaigning and start governing


10/24/09
President Barack Obama still steems to be running for office, rather than running the country, says Toby Harnden

-------------------------
Obama Still Campaigning On Taxpayer $

10/24/09


From, of all places, the Associated Press:


AP IMPACT: Obama’s travels carry a touch of blue
By Philip Elliott, Associated Press Writer

PITTSBURGH – For President Barack Obama, it’s almost as if the election campaign never ended. Just look at his travel schedule.

The same states that Obama targeted to win the White House are seeing an awful lot of the president, Vice President Joe Biden and top Cabinet officials. Only this year, the taxpayers are footing the multimillion-dollar tab for the trips, and Obama officials are delivering wheelbarrows of economic stimulus money — also compliments of taxpayers.

-----------------------------


Guess he's taking a page out of The Messiah's book. Obama was definitely known as the Campaigner-in-Chief.

 

It's amazing...whatever is said about our current Presitwit, his minions scurry off a-Googling to show Oblather did it, too.

 

It will be a long hard road, to drain the swamp and eradicate all the poison.

In the meantime, let these moonbat judges flail.

 

Hey guys did Obama also pay a surprise visit to Maryland?

 

If I am not mistaken a third judge has now blocked Trump's Muslim ban. But I will have to look that up to be sure.

 

The dissenting judge quotes the relevant provision of federal law, where Congress decided at 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f):

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.

ALSO;

The Ninth Curcuit made several other legal errors. Its holding that the States were likely to succeed on the merits of their procedural due process claims confound century-old precedent. And its unreasoned assumption that courts should simply plop Establishment Clause cases from the domestic context over to the foreign affairs context ignores the realities of our world.

When the correct standard of review is applied, the President does not have to come forward with supporting documentation to explain the basis for the Executive Order.

However, more to the point.

The district court judge in Hawaii, who was a fellow law graduate of Harvard law school with former President Obama, in fact, Obama was in Hawaii yesterday before the decision was issued.

His ruling based upon a false premise, concluding that the U.S.C. covers everyone in the world, yet, it doesn't, not at all.

Supreme Court implicitly said the opposite, when they said your right to association does not include a right to bring foreigners into the United States.

 

8 U.S. Code § 1182
(F) Waiver authorized


For provision authorizing waiver of certain subparagraphs of this paragraph, see subsection (h).

(H) Significant traffickers in persons
(i) In general


Any alien who commits or conspires to commit human trafficking offenses in the United States or outside the United States, or who the consular officer, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of State, or the Attorney General knows or has reason to believe is or has been a knowing aider, abettor, assister, conspirator, or colluder with such a trafficker in severe forms of trafficking in persons, as defined in the section 7102 of title 22, is inadmissible.

(ii) Beneficiaries of trafficking
Except as provided in clause (iii), any alien who the consular officer or the Attorney General knows or has reason to believe is the spouse, son, or daughter of an alien inadmissible under clause (i), has, within the previous 5 years, obtained any financial or other benefit from the illicit activity of that alien, and knew or reasonably should have known that the financial or other benefit was the product of such illicit activity, is inadmissible.

(iii) Exception for certain sons and daughters
Clause (ii) shall not apply to a son or daughter who was a child at the time he or she received the benefit described in such clause.


Based on your post I have provided the actual law in its full text and it DOES NOT say what you have claimed. Do I have to post the entirety of the law as written to prove that your belief is not anywhere within that law?

 

The new law, however, did not create a wide-open door. It also did not specifically get rid of a clause that allows the president to deny anybody entry to the U.S. under special circumstances.
8 U.S. Code § 1182
(2) Criminal and related grounds (A) Conviction of certain crimes
(i) In generalExcept as provided in clause (ii), any alien convicted of, or who admits having committed, or who admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of—
(I)
a crime involving moral turpitude (other than a purely political offense) or an attempt or conspiracy to commit such a crime, or
(II)
a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) any law or regulation of a State, the United States, or a foreign country relating to a controlled substance (as defined in section 802 of title 21),

 
===================================================================================================================

No, you dont need to post the entire law,as I have already posted that part of the law that is relevant to the dicussion at hand...see above.

 

The entire law is at play in such a discussion because all parts hold an equal stand on its meaning and dictate.
And even with what you are highlighting you alone prove that a blanket ban is illegal based on the fact that it included persons that are legally permissed to enter into or to travel to this nation are also being included. You do get that the State Department had cleared these people and had issued legal permissions for them to enter the country?
And as for laws defining moral turpitude that pertains to illegal acts and interactions while in this country.
Next bullshit version?

 

This nonsense puts Republicans in power for the next sixteen years, minimum, the moment we have our next San Bernardino, Boston Marathon, or Orlando. All it takes is one such incident, and the deaths will all be on the progressive activist judiciary and the fools who support them: every single idiot who drives with a COEXIST bumpersticker.

 

WOW clarise you must have just went total Trump.

 

You're as loopy as the rest of them......dismissed.

 

Sadly I am more sane than all of the idiots that back Trump.
But then again even the guy that has the license plate SKRTMN, that wears short skirts into stores is also.
Hell compared to mister " Obama and England spied on me" almost anyone is sane.

 

That's an xxxAddict retort. Not a Sanity_Is_Relative retort.

Here: I'll make it plain.

All of you who are cheering on these judges for handicapping a sitting president with ideologically motivated rulings: you are being set up.

WHEN we are attacked-- not IF, but WHEN-- it is all on you. Right or wrong, that will be the White House's answer, and everyone right of the far left will back it. The Trump you hate so much will win re-election in a landslide, and so will Congress, and so will Trump's successor if the judicial activism isn't reined in once and for all.

 

They are using the basis of law instead of Trumps use of race based ideological bullshit.
When we are attacked it will be on the useless fucking war machine that is the US government in whole that still thinks that WE are THE WORLD POLICE.
Trump is close to impeachment so re-election is not in sight.

 

The travel ban temporarily curtails travel to seven countries (or is it six). It doesn't ban a race.

The president commands the military, the borders, and federal homeland defense. Not the courts. The courts in this case are preventing the president from doing his job. So, when we are attacked, it will be on the courts.

Impeachment for what?