[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

America Erupts… ICE Raids Takeover The Streets

AC/DC- Riff Raff + Go Down [VH1 Uncut, July 5, 1996]

Why is Peter Schiff calling Bitcoin a ‘giant cult’ and how does this impact market sentiment?

Esso Your Butt Buddy Horseshit jacks off to that shit

"The Addled Activist Mind"

"Don’t Stop with Harvard"

"Does the Biden Cover-Up Have Two Layers?"

"Pete Rose, 'Shoeless' Joe Reinstated by MLB, Eligible for HOF"

"'Major Breakthrough': Here Are the Details on the China Trade Deal"

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly

"Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them"

ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby

Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson!

"The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent"

7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith

Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening

Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas

Trump’s DOGE Plan Is Legally Untouchable—Elon Musk Holds the Scalpel

Palestinians: What do you think of the Trump plan for Gaza?

What Happens Inside Gaza’s Secret Tunnels? | Unpacked

Hamas Torture Bodycam Footage: "These Monsters Filmed it All" | IDF Warfighter Doron Keidar, Ep. 225

EXPOSED: The Dark Truth About the Hostages in Gaza

New Task Force Ready To Expose Dark Secrets


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Trump’s proposal to keep out Muslims crosses a line for many in both parties
Source: Washington Post
URL Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli ... 5-bce4-708fe33e3288_story.html
Published: Dec 8, 2015
Author: staff
Post Date: 2015-12-08 21:09:02 by buckeroo
Keywords: None
Views: 6340
Comments: 49

Republican and Democratic leaders leveled their most forceful criticism yet against Donald Trump on Tuesday, widely denouncing the GOP presidential front-runner’s call to bar Muslims from entering the United States and signaling that Trump’s anti-immigrant and anti-Islamic rhetoric has agitated both parties more than ever.

At the White House, President Obama’s top spokesman said Trump’s proposal “disqualifies him” from the presidency, marking a rare administration foray into the 2016 race. On Capitol Hill, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the idea was at odds with the values of their party and the United States as a whole.

In the space of a day, Trump’s role as a domestic political provocateur expanded to international agitator as he sent a first-of-its kind signal abroad: The leading presidential contender in the opposition party wants to keep Muslims out of the United States.

Leaders across the globe condemned Trump as officials at home worried about the long-term implications of his actions. Trump called Monday for a “total and complete” ban on Muslims entering the United States until we “figure out what is going on.” He reiterated his overall view on Tuesday.

It was far from clear whether the proposed ban on Muslims would have a negative effect on Trump’s popularity, which has only grown as he has escalated his rhetoric against illegal immigrants and a host of other groups. Some of his rivals treaded carefully around his remarks, and many of his most vocal critics stopped short of refusing to back him if he is the Republican nominee. At a news conference on Dec. 8, 2015, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) dismissed Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s comments on banning Muslims from entering the United States. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Trump’s proposal “disqualifies him from serving as president,” declaring that his rhetoric is “harmful to the country” and makes it harder to “work in partnership” with American Muslim leaders to identify potential threats.

Earnest said that other candidates and Republican leaders “should say right now that they will not support him for president.”

Ryan, who typically stays out of the GOP presidential contest, made a strongly worded exception.

“Freedom of religion is a fundamental constitutional principle. It’s a founding principle of this country,” Ryan told reporters. “This is not conservatism. What was proposed yesterday is not what this party stands for. And more importantly, it’s not what this country stands for.”

McConnell called proposals to bar visitors on the basis of their religion “completely inconsistent” with American values.

But neither Republican said he would reject Trump if he won the nomination, and GOP senators facing difficult reelections dodged questions about whether they would support the provocative businessman if he won the nomination. Almost all Republicans who were questioned tried to duck that possibility, saying only that they would support the eventual nominee. Supporters cheer as Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks to the crowd at the USS Yorktown Monday in Mount Pleasant, S.C. (Sean Rayford/Getty Images)

“He knows that a lot of Americans agree, to a certain extent, with things that he says,” conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh said on his show Tuesday. “He also knows he’s the only one reaching those people.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), wary of alienating Trump supporters as he tries to consolidate the conservative wing of the party, emphasized that he differed with that specific policy proposed by Trump.

“I disagree with that proposal. I like Donald Trump. A lot of our friends here have encouraged me to criticize and attack Donald Trump. I’m not interested in doing so,” Cruz told reporters.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a long-shot near the bottom of the field, told a New Hampshire radio station that it is “a mistake to base immigration or moratoriums based on religion,” but added, “I’ve called for something similar.” Paul was referring to a measure that would suspend the issuance of visas to refugees from about 30 countries “that have large jihadist movements,” pending strict background checks.

The Christian Broadcasting Network’s chief political correspondent, David Brody, wrote that Trump’s position is likely to resonate with Christian evangelicals, as long as he is able to verbalize “the underlying theological problems with Islam and the Quran.” Several prominent evangelical leaders in Iowa and elsewhere who are often quick to comment on the twists and turns of the election declined to comment on Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims entering the country.

After announcing his proposal — which he said was a response to recent terrorist attacks in Paris and California — he was greeted with adoration by his legion of fans on Twitter and at a raucous rally Monday night in South Carolina. On Tuesday, Trump conducted a contentious round of morning news-show interviews in which he defended the idea against critics who have deemed it unconstitutional, illegal, racist, dangerous and un-American.

Although Trump’s aides had initially said no one would be exempt from the “total” ban, the candidate began listing exceptions he would make. U.S. citizens who are Muslim and traveling abroad would be allowed to reenter, along with Muslim members of the U.S. military returning from tours overseas. Muslim leaders of foreign countries would also be allowed in, and exceptions would be made for athletes visiting the United States for competitions.

In the interviews, Trump performed as he usually does — deflecting questions, avoiding specifics and talking over the journalists trying to ask him questions. During an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that lasted more than 30 minutes, host Joe Scarborough told Trump to stop talking so that he could ask the candidate a question, then cut to a commercial.

Corey Saylor, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, predicted that Trump’s comments would make it easier for the Islamic State terrorist group to radicalize potential recruits.

“I think that Trump’s statement is a propaganda coup for ISIS,” he said. “No doubt in my mind about that.”

Some Democrats said Tuesday that the Republican Party is partly culpable in Trump’s rise.

“Republicans today are still saying they will support Trump if he is their nominee. Why? Because they are intimidated by his support and his supporters,” said Paul Begala, a strategist with the pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC Priorities USA Action. “Trump may be the monster, but the GOP establishment is the Dr. Frankenstein who created him.”

Many Republicans worry that Trump’s proposals — which have drawn comparisons to those of Adolf Hitler and to the internment of Japanese Americans on U.S. soil during World War II — will do lasting damage to a party desperately trying to cast itself as more tolerant and open than in previous presidential elections.

Tom Ridge, a former Republican governor of Pennsylvania who became the first secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, said Tuesday he would not vote for Trump. Ridge said that his anger over Trump’s popularity has been building for months and that he was frustrated that many fellow Republicans took so long to denounce the candidate’s rhetoric.

“I think the man is an embarrassment to my party,” said Ridge, who supports Trump’s rival Jeb Bush. “He’s an embarrassment to our country. We deserve better than this.”

Trump’s actions also hold implications down the ballot. Rep. David Jolly (Fla.), a centrist Republican running for U.S. Senate who backs Bush, took to the House floor Tuesday to call for Trump to end his campaign.

“I think its been a dark day for the country,” Jolly said in an interview. He encouraged other GOP leaders to “speak up.”

While Trump has gone furthest in his rhetoric and proposals, other candidates have given voice to views that Democrats have condemned as anti-Muslim. “Their language may be more veiled than Mr. Trump’s, but their ideas aren’t so different,” Democratic presidential front-runner Clinton wrote Tuesday on her website.

All of the GOP candidates have called for at least a pause in the acceptance of most Syrian refugees. Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson has said that a Muslim should not be president and has argued that accepting Syrian refugees into the United States is “a suspension of intellect.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), seen by many party leaders as the GOP’s best hope for cross-party appeal, has equated Muslims with Nazis and dismissed complaints of anti-Muslim bias.

“Where is there widespread evidence that we have a problem in America with discrimination against Muslims?” Rubio said on Fox News Sunday night after Obama’s address to the nation urging tolerance.

The anti-Muslim rhetoric Trump and some of his rivals have been using stands in stark contrast to the tone struck by then-President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

In working to tamp down anti-Muslim sentiment that erupted after the attacks, Bush repeatedly talked about Islam as a peaceful religion and said the terrorists did not represent Muslims around the world. He quoted the Koran during remarks at the Islamic Center of Washington six days after 9/11. Three days after that, he spoke directly to Muslims during an address before a joint session of Congress.

“We respect your faith,” Bush said. “It’s practiced freely by many millions of Americans and by millions more in countries that America counts as friends.”

On Tuesday, Trump’s message sounded much different.

“I would want to engage the Muslim community, but the Muslim community has to help us,” he said on “Morning Joe.” “They’re not helping us.”


ROTFL ... finally America may have a man with the GUTS & CONVICTION to protect America based on Constitutional restraint and we have a pile of socialists in the WhiteHouse suggesting the man is "disqualified."

I am edging to vote Trump after this BS.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-8) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#9. To: buckeroo (#8) (Edited)

Which goes a long ways towards highlighting what is wrong with both branches of the ruling part.

Pete - Please explain your quote above. I am baffled at the idea there are only two branches with a ruling part. I thoughy America had three branches of government with separated political parties influencing government. Help me out of my confusion!

Ok,everybody claims we have open government and a two (or more) party political system with opposing parties and idealogies.

We did at one time. What we have now is a One Party system,with the alleged Republicans being one branch,and the Democrats being the other branch.

What you are talking about are the established branches of government that "We,the people" are supposed to be in control of though our elected representatives. That is the nuts and bolts of our system of government,established by the Constitution,and what our elected "representatives" swear an oath to protect and obey.

The problem is "We,the people" now have very few people in public office that represent us. They represent themselves,and the corporations that pull their strings.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.

sneakypete  posted on  2015-12-09   0:00:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: buckeroo (#0)

Trump’s proposal to keep out Muslims crosses a line for many in both parties

That's because both parties are composed of a predominance of brainless pussys.

rlk  posted on  2015-12-09   0:14:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: buckeroo, liberator, TooConservative, tomder55, GarySpFc, A K A Stone, Vicomte13, *Islamic caliphate expansion* (#0)

In the space of a day, Trump’s role as a domestic political provocateur expanded to international agitator as he sent a first-of-its kind signal abroad: The leading presidential contender in the opposition party wants to keep Muslims out of the United States.

He really wants to be assured of any Muslims who come in. Which means better screening.

Can we blame him for wanting this? 14 Americans were recently murdered by foreigners who used another LEGAL immigration process.

Trump of course handled this stupidly.

On Tuesday, Trump’s message sounded much different.

“I would want to engage the Muslim community, but the Muslim community has to help us,” he said on “Morning Joe.” “They’re not helping us.”

Now that is on target.

redleghunter  posted on  2015-12-09   2:19:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: redleghunter (#11)

I don't think Trump handled this stupidly at all. I think he threw a great big rock in the pond that distinguishes him from every other candidate, and that flushed candidates like Christie and Jeb Bush out into the open, to declare their favoritism for Muslim immigration over protection of the American people. Hillary is out fundraising using the picture of her pet Muslim Huma Abedin Weiner.

Trump's declaration forced a clarity. And then after people rage and rage and rage, and he speaks of what his proposal entails, he sounds reasonable, and the wailers and screamers sound like outed ninnies. Because they are: Trump outed them.

He also demonstrated that he has balls of solid rock.

Trump did himself a lot of favors with this, because he has forced the GOP into the situation where they either stick with him to the or Hillary wins.

Stupid? Nope. He's in a negotiation with the American people and with his party. His party is hostile to him. So he is appealing to the people - and it is working. Even at work, people who before said he was not really in it sat back and took another look. He's definitely in it, in their eyes.

Trump is fighting for the Presidency, he's taking no prisoners, and he's leaving the party with a choice: him, or Clinton.

It's a good strategy - bright colors, sharp distinctions. And HIS positions are the beliefs of the bulk of the frustrated American people.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-09   6:23:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: redleghunter (#11)

Trump of course handled this stupidly.

Yeah his statement was a bit weak. He should have said deport all Muslims from the country and never ever let any back in again.

Revoke citizenship of muslims. They aren't Americans.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-12-09   8:01:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: redleghunter, buckeroo, liberator, TooConservative, GarySpFc, A K A Stone, Vicomte13, (#11)

Again Trump has 'sucked all the oxygen out of the room'. Instead of talking about the emperor's pathetic speech Sunday and his lame response to the San Bernardino massacre the news is non-stop Trump's over the top comments (which he predictably is walking back because even he knows he went too far). So the emperor and the Dems are getting a pass instead of getting the negative press they would've during this cycle . Sometimes I believe he is a trojan horse .

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

tomder55  posted on  2015-12-09   8:41:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: tomder55 (#14)

It is already against the law for muslims to come here.

See the article I posted earlier.

They need to be rounded up and dropped over the desert in the middle east.

Revoke citizenship of all Muslims. There is no such thing as an American citizen muslim.

You can't have two masters.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-12-09   8:44:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: redleghunter, tomder55 (#11)

Trump of course handled this stupidly.

What is he worded it this way? Do you agree with the statement below?

Mr. President, we don’t need more gun control—we need border patrol. No Muslims should be allowed into this country until there’s a process in place to fully vet them. We’ve got to turn away those who could potentially pose a threat until this war with radical Islam is over.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-12-09   8:55:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: A K A Stone, redleghunter (#16)

That would be his walk back statement . Got no problem with that . His original statement was “total and complete ban on Muslims entering the United States". He's nuts and a hypocrite too. I wonder if he would ban Hussain Sajwani ,his billionaire real estate buddy from Dubai(who also happens to have a criminal record) ?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

tomder55  posted on  2015-12-09   9:30:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: tomder55 (#17)

It wasn't his statement. It was Franklin Grahms. Saying pretty much the same thing.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-12-09   10:33:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13 (#13)

Yeah his statement was a bit weak. He should have said deport all Muslims from the country and never ever let any back in again.

Revoke citizenship of muslims. They aren't Americans.

My point was he could have made one minor adjustment to his comments.

He could have said the following:

"I am for the US and her citizens first. I will do everything within my executive office when elected President to ensure the safety of America and Americans."

Then he could rhapsody whatever he liked to do focusing on the specific threat of Jihadists using LEGAL methods of immigration and residency to kill Americans.

Game, set and match.

redleghunter  posted on  2015-12-09   11:28:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13, tomder55 (#16)

Mr. President, we don’t need more gun control—we need border patrol. No Muslims should be allowed into this country until there’s a process in place to fully vet them. We’ve got to turn away those who could potentially pose a threat until this war with radical Islam is over.

The "No Muslims should be allowed" is what the detractors have exploited. First business of defeating an enemy is take away his ammo and fuel stores.

He could have said "We should not allow refugees and immigration from violent states hostile towards the US and her allies."

If he did that within the other words of his statement, he would be sitting much higher today and not playing defense. He is running for POTUS. He needs to always be on the offensive against his opponents not on the defensive.

Now if Trump's strategy was to win Iowa by 20 points or more and he just threw out giant red meat rhetoric, then mission accomplished. But speaking for the wider primary and general election? He just bombed a city street to ashes to get one sniper in one building.

redleghunter  posted on  2015-12-09   11:47:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: A K A Stone, y'all (#16)

No Muslims should be allowed into this country until there's a process in place to fully vet them.

Public Law 414, established both the law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of Aliens to the US and remains in effect today.

Among the many issues it covers, one in particular, found in Chapter 2 Section 212, is the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by “force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.” This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration to the United States, but this law is being ignored by the White House.

Islamic immigration to the US would be prohibited under this law because the Koran, Sharia Law and the Hadith all require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the US government, the Constitution, and to the Republic. All Muslims who attest that the Koran is their life’s guiding principal subscribe to submission to Islam and its form of government.

tpaine  posted on  2015-12-09   12:51:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: redleghunter (#20)

I think that Trump just divided the nation into neat sharp lines, that most of the people stand on his side of it, that the ones who don't never will, and that the Republicans screaming at him and squirming away just lost many of their voters to him.

I think it was a winning strategy.

I also see a standard negotiating tactic. You come out with something big, and then you see where you get pushback, and you make little concessions about things you don't really care about anyway.

Trump doesn't play like a standard politician. He is much more savvy about people than they are.

What he is doing now, making precisions, is trying to be spun as backtracking and negative, but really what it is is this: Trump made a big, loud pitch. He got everybody's attention and got all of the focus. GASP! Did he REALLY say that?! Then people tune in to see if Trump's a madman. And they hear him being reasonable - and pointing out how feckless our existing policy is. And then they see Democrats and his Republican rivals PANDERING to Muslims. And many go over to Trump never to come back.

I think it's effective. It's calculated offense.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-09   13:41:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Vicomte13 (#22)

I think it's effective. It's calculated offense.

If you say so:) We shall see.

For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:6-8)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-12-09   13:44:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: redleghunter (#23)

If you say so:) We shall see.

We shall indeed.

Trump is not like me. He calculates his offense.

I say things that I don't even think are offensive and I have people peeling off their faces and bleeding out the eyes at me.

Perhaps I am best suited to be a desert Stylite.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-09   14:07:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone, Vicomte13 (#19)

He could have said the following:

"I am for the US and her citizens first. I will do everything within my executive office when elected President to ensure the safety of America and Americans."

He could have said the following:

8 United States Code 1182(f) states, and I intend to utilize this law to the fullest:

(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

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. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

I intend to restrict the entry of aliens to those who successfully pass a rigorous screening and vetting process which I shall promulgate.

Trump could have said that. However, what he did say has enabled him to once again suck all oxygen out of the political debate, and he can reserve this to slam his GOP detractors later.

http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2013/title-8/chapter-12/subchapter-ii/part-ii/section-1182/

8 USC 1182, Inadmissible Aliens (GPO)

nolu chan  posted on  2015-12-09   15:52:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: nolu chan (#25)

Yes, Trump could have given a dull, legalistic answer. Instead, he gave a short, memorable gut punch of an answer that caused the Democrats to openly ally with the Muslims to raise money - and the Republicans to start genuflecting to Muslims - all of which makes Trump look like the only strong one in the room.

Trump helped himself a lot with this. The people screaming were never going to vote for him anyway. And others are taking a new look at a guy with balls.

And of course rust never sleeps, so we can expect that, Muslims being Muslims, there will be a heapin' helpin' o' fresh Muzzie atrocities hitting the news every month between now and the election. And you can be damned sure that Trump will be bringing each one up in front of the cameras, and pounding his point about the need to stop Muslim immigration into the national conscience like a piledriver.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-09   16:26:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Vicomte13 (#26)

the Republicans to start genuflecting to Muslims - all of which makes Trump look like the only strong one in the room.

Trump helped himself a lot with this.

Yes, Trump separated the GOP field into two groups, the one man Trump group, and those who took a knee.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-12-09   16:51:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: nolu chan, A K A Stone (#25)

Excellent research again Chan. You will be on my campaign team when I run for President:) AKA will be my public relations guy:) LOL...

For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:6-8)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-12-09   16:55:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: redleghunter (#28)

Excellent research again Chan. You will be on my campaign team when I run for President:) AKA will be my public relations guy:) LOL...

I suppose I won't be your Billy Graham...

But I think the Cabinet needs to add that hoary old office from the Vatican: Devil's Advocate.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-09   17:08:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: nolu chan (#27)

Yes, Trump separated the GOP field into two groups, the one man Trump group, and those who took a knee.

To be fair to Cruz, he merely said that what Trump said wasn't his policy, but he didn't otherwise attack Trump.

And while Paul said he opposed Trump, he acknowledged that his own proposal of not so long ago, sounded substantially the same.

Neither of them started wailing about un-American-ness or the like

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-09   17:10:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: Vicomte13, nolu chan, Y'ALL (#30) (Edited)

--- while Paul said he opposed Trump, he acknowledged that his own proposal of not so long ago, sounded substantially the same.

And both are correct in their 'proposals', as they conform to both the Constitution, and to existing law...

Public Law 414, established both the law and the intent of Congress regarding the immigration of Aliens to the US and remains in effect today. --- Among the many issues it covers, one in particular, found in Chapter 2 Section 212, is the prohibition of entry to the US if the Alien belongs to an organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by “force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.” ---- This, by its very definition, rules out Islamic immigration to the United States, but this law is being ignored by the White House.

tpaine  posted on  2015-12-09   17:50:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Vicomte13 (#29)

But I think the Cabinet needs to add that hoary old office from the Vatican: Devil's Advocate.

I was thinking of you in the capacity of ambassador and lawyer.

The stuff AKA says as public relations rep will need a spinmeister to smooth things out.

I still have Vatican insiders. I am a graduate of a Jesuit university. I can "knock rings" with the Pope himself right now:)

Why do you think Frankie has been doing outreach with Evangelicals?

;)

For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:6-8)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-12-09   22:59:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: redleghunter (#32)

Ambassador to France

Special Envoy to Russia would be better.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-09   23:30:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: Vicomte13, sneakypete (#33)

With sneakypete as my Demarche agent at large for the Middle East.

For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:6-8)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-12-09   23:49:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Vicomte13, redleghunter (#24)

Trump is not like me. He calculates his offense.

No, he just blurts things out. Pretty much any garbage that floats through his mind.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-12-10   3:09:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: TooConservative (#35)

he just blurts things out. Pretty much any garbage that floats through his mind.

I've observed this kind of obnoxious behavior on various liberty themed websites. It really does get old, doesn't it.

Operation 40  posted on  2015-12-10   6:13:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Operation 40 (#36)

I've observed this kind of obnoxious behavior on various liberty themed websites. It really does get old, doesn't it.

So liberty-themed websites are the only place on the internet you encounter this?

I was talking about a half-baked candidate, not websites.

And who is forcing you to post on these awful liberty-themed websites anyway?

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-12-10   6:29:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: TooConservative (#35)

No, he just blurts things out. Pretty much any garbage that floats through his mind.

Stopping Muslim immigration for the time being is not garbage. It's smart.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-10   8:56:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: redleghunter (#34)

With sneakypete as my Demarche agent at large for the Middle East.

There might be some unhappy campers living in caves in the Muddle East,but it works for me.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.

sneakypete  posted on  2015-12-10   9:04:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: TooConservative, Vicomte13, redleghunter (#35)

Trump is not like me. He calculates his offense.

No, he just blurts things out. Pretty much any garbage that floats through his mind.

Easy to do when you have planned from minute one to drop out late in the race because you know you will never have to back up anything you say with action.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.

sneakypete  posted on  2015-12-10   9:07:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: Vicomte13, tomder55 (#38)

Stopping Muslim immigration for the time being is not garbage. It's smart.

How about just a pause on illegal immigration and on refugees and asylum seekers (recalling that Papa Tsarnaev and Djokar were admitted under asylum provisions)?

That is the position Trump should have. He could stop the the Muslim sleepers and the Mexican rapists -- as he so charmingly puts it -- in one fell swoop.

But then, he isn't actually serious about any of it. What surprises me is that you, for all your railing about GOP stockjobbing and official corruption, is falling for the biggest con job by any (nominal) GOP pol in our lifetimes.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-12-10   9:42:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: TooConservative (#41)

But then, he isn't actually serious about any of it. What surprises me is that you, for all your railing about GOP stockjobbing and official corruption, is falling for the biggest con job by any (nominal) GOP pol in our lifetimes.

Donald Trump made his money building buildings in the private sector. That's hard work because of all of the pieces you have to bring together, the skein of regulations you have to fight, etc.

Republican crony capitalists in the defense industry make their fortunes because the government engages in wars of choice. In agribusiness, the cronies earn vast profits by unenforced immigration laws. In extraction industries, they earn their fortunes through corrupt sweetheart deals with their cronies. In finance, the cronies get the hedge fund carried interest rule. That's how they accumulate THEIR money.

Trump made his by building and selling properties. He has to engage with government for permitting and to get various easements and other approval. If he can get favorable tax treatment, that's great.

The other key difference is that Trump RECOGNIZES that political contributions are pay-to-play crony capitalism because he has ENGAGED in it. HE knows the game, and he is seeking to END it. The other crony capitalists are looking to hang onto their perks.

Trump is different.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-10   10:38:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: Vicomte13 (#42)

HE knows the game, and he is seeking to END it.

Other than sheer delusion and a schoolgirl crush on Donald, do you have any basis to believe that Trump would actually do that?

Trump is far more likely to do even more corrupt business-as-usual than to reform it in any way.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-12-10   10:51:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: TooConservative (#43)

Other than sheer delusion and a schoolgirl crush on Donald,

Careful, he might hit you with his purse.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-12-10   11:05:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: TooConservative (#43)

Other than sheer delusion and a schoolgirl crush on Donald, do you have any basis to believe that Trump would actually do that?

I have no basis other than hope upon which to believe that any politician will do anything other than be a corrupt pig.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-10   11:24:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Vicomte13, sneakypete, TooConservative, y'all (#42)

TooConservative (#41)

--- he, (Trump) isn't actually serious about any of it. What surprises me is that you, (sneakypete) for all your railing about GOP stockjobbing and official corruption, is falling for the biggest con job by any (nominal) GOP pol in our lifetimes. --

Vicomte ---- Trump RECOGNIZES that political contributions are pay-to-play crony capitalism because he has ENGAGED in it. HE knows the game, and he is seeking to END it. The other crony capitalists are looking to hang onto their perks.

--- Donald Trump made his money building buildings in the private sector. That's hard work because of all of the pieces you have to bring together, the skein of regulations you have to fight, etc.

I doubt that anyone here is naive enough to believe that Trump hasn't been , (and even if elected, would continue to be), --- a corrupt crony capitalist..

But the American presidency doesn't have unlimited power. -- Like all presidents before him, Trump would be controlled by our system of checks and balances..

Never fear, that system is working, as an ineffectual Obama is presently finding out...

tpaine  posted on  2015-12-10   11:25:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: Fred Mertz (#44)

Careful, he might hit you with his purse.

Or fart a unicorn on him.

Unicorn bites can be pretty nasty.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-12-10   11:25:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Vicomte13 TooConservative, redleghunter (#45) (Edited)

I have no basis other than hope upon which to believe that any politician will do anything other than be a corrupt pig.

The old 'hope and change' .That's been working out so well.

I am looking for a government that operates in the 'few and defined' Constitutional powers . The progressives believe in a leviathan government with almost unlimited powers as long as it is for the good of the people. Now I believe that CONGRESS has the plenary powers to exclude immigrants based on religion or ethnicity . The President has no such powers without Congressional authority (unless he invokes "inherent " war powers even though even the AUMF says nothing about Islam).

Imagine how much larger the government would have to be to enforce his ideas . How do you like the TSA now ? I see a TSA on steroids under a President Trump.The candidate I support has to tell me how he /she would shrink the size of the government .Which agencies would be eliminated /consolidated ?I am looking for a reduction in regulations ;not another President that will create them out of whole cloth with a pen and a phone.

For the sake of argument I'll concede his business prowess ...his ability to work the system ,his ability to make "great business deals " . That doesn't mean squat . He is the sole master of his world . As POTUS he will not be able to bark out dictates and expect them to be done.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

tomder55  posted on  2015-12-10   12:39:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: tomder55, Vicomte13 TooConservative, redleghunter (#48)

I am looking for a government that operates in the 'few and defined' Constitutional powers . The progressives believe in a leviathan government with almost unlimited powers as long as it is for the good of the people. Now I believe that CONGRESS has the plenary powers to exclude immigrants based on religion or ethnicity . The President has no such powers without Congressional authority (unless he invokes "inherent " war powers even though even the AUMF says nothing about Islam).

The government power over immigration falls under the plenary power doctrine. The President has the power to act by proclamation pursuant to law since 1952.

http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2013/title-8/chapter-12/subchapter-ii/part-ii/section-1182/

2013 US Code
Title 8 - Aliens and Nationality
Chapter 12 - IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY (§§ 1101 - 1537)
Subchapter II - IMMIGRATION (§§ 1151 - 1381)
Part II - Admission Qualifications for Aliens; Travel Control of Citizens and Aliens (§§ 1181 - 1189)
Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Inadmissible aliens - 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (2013)

8 U.S.C. § 1182, PDF DOWNLOAD (GPO, entire section) [1182(f) at text p. 134, pdf p. 13]

8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) (2013)

(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

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. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

http://www.bu.edu/lawlibrary/PDFs/research/portals/66stat163.pdf

Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952, Section 212(e), 66 Stat. 163, 188 (1952), P.L. 414

Suspension of entry by President

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.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-12-10   16:04:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com