- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Appeals Court Rejects Request to Immediately Restore Travel Ban
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:42 am to a want
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:42 am to a want
quote:bullshite
Conway, tried to float the "massacre" story
quote:I was not referring to Bannon. That was bad enough. I was referring to your unbelievably obtuse rhetorical reach on immigrant terrorists
I unintentionally misidentified Bannon
0
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:45 am to a want
quote:
I boogered up two or three pages of a pretty good thread
So based on your admission, because you are now eating your words, you or more-or-less eating your own boogers. Ewwww!
This post was edited on 2/5/17 at 7:49 am
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:46 am to TakingStock
What are you talking about? The judge was appointed by a "conservative" Republican. Maybe some of you should do your own reading on topics instead of being stuck in a vacuum.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:46 am to Cromulent
quote:
The judge was appointed by a "conservative" Republican.
This doesn't mean the judge is correct.
ETA: I walso wouldn't consider that President to be very conservative.
This post was edited on 2/5/17 at 7:48 am
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:48 am to Cromulent
Another new shill
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:48 am to TGFN57
The real reason they're all wetting their got damned panties over this is because they know if the US can pull this off, other countries will fall in line and do the same. Scares these liberals shitless.
Also, they're pissed about the fact that the man has addressed almost everyone of his campaign promises in his first two weeks. Remember......he's suckered all of you, he'll never even try and do half the shite he's promising.
Keep it up and keep winning.
Also, they're pissed about the fact that the man has addressed almost everyone of his campaign promises in his first two weeks. Remember......he's suckered all of you, he'll never even try and do half the shite he's promising.
Keep it up and keep winning.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:48 am to HighYieldReturns
quote:
decision was a no brainer.
obvious the judge had no brain
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:52 am to Cromulent
quote:
The judge was appointed by a "conservative" Republican.
That was put there by a Bush. Maybe you should do some comprehension.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 7:54 am to a want
quote:see how easily that can occur?
Should have said refugees not immigrants.....
But the larger issue (responsive to what you actually meant) is that refugees is a noninclusive term regarding context of this EO. The EO deals with immigration from select sites in toto, not just refugees. In fact refugees could apply for exemption.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:03 am to Revelator
quote:call up Switzerland
Revelator
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:06 am to Cromulent
quote:The judge is a liberal nitwit. He isn't a nitwit by virtue of being liberal opr because he is liberal. There are brilliant liberal judges. There are con nitwits. This man is a nitwit who just happens to be a lib.
The judge was appointed by a "conservative" Republican.
Why he was nominated, or what deals were struck with individuals in Congress in concert, who knows? It's part of politics. But suggesting this dingbat is either a conservative judge, or appropriately restrained in his findings is ridiculous.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:06 am to Tigereye10005
quote:
It's universally accepted by the legal community that the US cannot limit or ban immigration for *any* reason. Whether you agree with it or not, our laws do not allow arbitrary or indiscriminate immigration bans. Now they're just deciding whether the reasons put in the EO are acceptable reasons.
So foreign countries can but we can't? I don't believe this.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:07 am to Tigereye10005
So the president makes a national security directive based on Intel and the council of generals and some clueless lib judge can just undo it? Awesome
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:08 am to Tigereye10005
quote:
Appeals Court Rejects Request to Immediately Restore Travel Ban
9th Circuit - full of radical activists - worthless.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:09 am to Vacherie Saint
So much for this being temporary. The left has guaranteed that this will go on for a long time now.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:09 am to Revelator
quote:
So foreign countries can but we can't?
Foreign countries don't have US law...
This post was edited on 2/5/17 at 8:10 am
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:10 am to Tigereye10005
Shocking.
Not.
Not.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:12 am to Tigereye10005
quote:
It's universally accepted by the legal community that the US cannot limit or ban immigration for *any* reason.
No, it's not.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:12 am to Tigereye10005
quote:Ellis island says "hi".
It's universally accepted by the legal community that the US cannot limit or ban immigration for *any* reason.
Saying "It's universally accepted by the legal community that the US cannot limit or ban immigration for *any* reason," is just silliness.
Posted on 2/5/17 at 8:13 am to Revelator
quote:
It's universally accepted by the legal community that the US cannot limit or ban immigration for *any* reason.
Defense and control of the borders is the most fundamental purpose of the government
if the leftists are sincere that the government cannot do this job, then there is really no reason to have government
Page 4 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News