we need a new moniker for this kind of political play....
#lamedeadcat
#****trump
#spicerspecial
#jambabolloxs
Will Congress also be looking into the Apprentice ratings? That seems to be equally important to Donald.
#anythingbutSessions
It's pure obfuscation & deflection from Trump in attempt to hide the fact that he's in the smelly due to senior members of his gov lying to the senate.
Indeed - since Trump's tweets did not succeed in deflecting the Russiagate interest, they put an even smellier cat on the table. But what happens if there is now an investigation and it becomes clear that the FBI *were* listening to Trump's phones, and why?
me thinks the administration is very nervous about Sessions.
I wrote a short essay on leadership, the point being I had to pick anyone who was a leader and then analyse what made them a leader, good and bad and I was struggling to think of a subject.
It was a few years ago so I chose Obama, mainly as it was topical and I didn't know that much about him so he would be an interesting subject.
The main thing I took away from the research that he's had a very illustrious past, is highly educated and very moralistic.
In hindsight I couldn't have chosen a much better subject to study.
It's fascinating to see how many people think that he was a bad leader though, and thier reasons for thinking so.
Then we have trump, a dubious business man with a murky reputation and a playboy wife..
The whole tax returns thing strikes me as crazy, trump still refuses to disclose, if he's as squeaky clean as he makes out he could destroy a lot if not all criticism very easily.
But he won't, and I don't think anyone can sincerely say that they don't have a strong suspicion as to why that is, lol!
But he won't, and I don't think anyone can sincerely say that they don't have a strong suspicion as to why that is, lol!
my guess is he's not a real billionaire. Yes he's got money but he's not Warren Buffet or Bill Gates.
"It was a few years ago so I chose Obama, mainly as it was topical and I didn't know that much about him so he would be an interesting subject.
The main thing I took away from the research that he's had a very illustrious past, is highly educated and very moralistic."
I read Audacity of Hope for pretty much the same reasons as you shortly before he became President. I came away with very positive impressions.
Absolutely, nothing in my readings made me think at any point Obama was anything other than a sensible, driven, educated man with sound ethics.
I also wondered, well, I don't wonder, I know...
Why the current USA administration communicates to the country via tweets rather than proper press conference or public announcement etc. that allows more than one sentence to be written at any one time ... Hmmm
Sounds to me like Spicer or Bannon have "had a word".
[quote=mattyfez ]The whole tax returns thing strikes me as crazy, trump still refuses to disclose, if he's as squeaky clean as he makes out he could destroy a lot if not all criticism very easily.
But he won't, and I don't think anyone can sincerely say that they don't have a strong suspicion as to why that is, lol!
Personally I still think it's just part of the game and/or more deflection. There probably isn't anything that dodgy in them, but it's clear that it's done him no harm not to release them, and so long as we keep talking about those we're ignoring worse stuff.
Or several, repeatedly its decent flight down to the weekend golf game, sure he has better things to do than trapse off to hang out with his mates for the weekends at the moment.
Personally I still think it's just part of the game and/or more deflection. There probably isn't anything that dodgy in them, but it's clear that it's done him no harm not to release them, and so long as we keep talking about those we're ignoring worse stuff.
Even if he did release them, the people whinging about it would be silenced for about 0.5 nanoseconds before demanding that he release something else (another conspiratorial hidden smoking gun that turns out to be a wet phart) so it is of no benefit releasing them to someone else's timescale - better to do it just before the next election and then say "told you there was nothing improper"
Or several, repeatedly its decent flight down to the weekend golf game, sure he has better things to do than trapse off to hang out with his mates for the weekends at the moment.
Yes, or another front page scandal about how he eats his steak
Welcome back Ninfan - hope you enjoyed the break and that you don't get physically threatened on here again. Poor show that this was "condoned".
Keep it real!
teamhurtmore
Welcome back Ninfan - hope you enjoyed the break and that you don't get physically threatened on here again.
If you run up an pull the tail of a tiger, would you be surprised to get bitten?
If you don't want to get hit, don't start a fight....... 😆
'Tis the way of the world I think THM, anything can be excused as long your political affiliations swing the same way as the progressive or 'modern' paradigm 😉
Even if he did release them
He won't release them as they probably reveal that he offset taxes against a massive loss, that a) makes him look less wealthy than he pretends and b) that he's paid less tax than his cleaner.
He has more to loose than others have gain by seeing them
Yes, or another front page scandal about how he eats his steak
No that one is both for the irony and the hipocracy of calling out Obama every time he played a round of golf pointing out that the country needed running.
Second to that is how much does it cost to relocate all of them to Trump's club, how much is he taking/making from that (For example several journalists now have bought memberships to follow the story) you have to remember in his first month he cost the secret service what Obama did in a year which involved flying his family around to make him more money. It's about corruption and pocket lining at the highest level.
On his tax returns the longer he hides the more we can assume. Yers part of it is all diversion but the lies tag is sticking now.
On the real issues though it might well look like spilts and arguments - he doesn't seem to grasp why Sessions can't be involved investigating himself (The arguments were even repoted on Fox!!) If (and when) he goes his son in law maybe too (makes Ivanka's position difficult) he needs to get some more picks through hearings for the jobs (remember he still doesn't have a full cabinet as several keep feeling the need to withdraw) he has burned some of his actual allies but getting them to force through people who won't make the first 3 months. There will be no free passes.
Finally is (as the facts are stacking up to show) that a host of his senior staff had secret meetings with the Russian ambassador and kept it from him is he incompetant for bad picks? Blissfully unaware of people running a second level of government below him? Or will somebody break the code and land it with him?
aracer - MemberI was hoping he might emulate Lincoln.
I dont think hes a theatre goer
"Apart from that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" 😀
Yes, welcome back ninfan.
Solid start, to lay your cards on the table and let us know that you are not in favour of progress.
Carry on.
Even if he did release them, the people whinging about it would be silenced for about 0.5 nanoseconds before demanding that he release something else (another conspiratorial hidden smoking gun that turns out to be a wet phart)
Ahem.
[url= http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/67-times-donald-trump-tweeted-birther-movement/story?id=42145590 ]67 Times Trump Tweeted about Obama's Birth Certificate[/url]
[url= http://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/18/politics/trump-obama-muslim-birther/ ]Trump's history of suggesting Obama is a Muslim[/url]
"Even if he did release them, the people whinging about it would be silenced for about 0.5 nanoseconds before demanding that he release something else (another conspiratorial hidden smoking gun that turns out to be a wet phart) so it is of no benefit releasing them to someone else's timescale - better to do it just before the next election"
Better to never release them ever. Corbyn's taught us that. Corbyn's are pretty simple and the press still find things wrong. I'd imagine it would be impossible to get a complex Tax Return to a point where it stood up to press scrutiny.
Hey where is the the steel for that pipeline coming from? Russia you say....
Better to never release them ever. Corbyn's taught us that. Corbyn's are pretty simple and the press still find things wrong. I'd imagine it would be impossible to get a complex Tax Return to a point where it stood up to press scrutiny.
Dam I'm sold there, too complex for the likes of me and you. Best not knowing who your politicians are invested and in debt to. Or what sort of tax avoidance schemes they are using. Transparency works by being transparent.
Trumps latest dead cat shows hes getting more desperate
It hasnt helped and just seems to be focusing attention on why He was being investigated in the first place?!?
I wonder if Putin is hovering over the upload button on the pee-pee videos
Theres more leaked reports 😉 of Trumps frustration & anger at leaks and failure to handle the Sessions thing as it dominated his well received congress address (the one time he managed to stay on message and not cause a diplomatic shitstorm)
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/04/politics/donald-trump-jeff-sessions-reince-priebus/index.html
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-39184048 ]mischievous Mr King 🙂 [/url]
So Trump signed on the 27th of January an executive order banning people from certain countries because he needed 90 days to "figure out what is going on". He has now signed another executive order banning people from certain countries for 90 days, what the hell has he been doing for the last 40 days? Why does he need another 90 days? Will he ever figure out what's going on?
I think it may even be 120 days this time
So Trump signed on the 27th of January an executive order banning people from certain countries because he needed 90 days to "figure out what is going on". He has now signed another executive order banning people from certain countries for 90 days, what the hell has he been doing for the last 40 days? Why does he need another 90 days? Will he ever figure out what's going on?
Look at it another way, as a result of his ban, Iraq has now agreed ([url= http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/06/politics/iraq-travel-ban/ ]Source: CNN[/url]) to vetting and information sharing requirements, meaning that it has been removed from the list - which only reinforces the fact that Trumps original ban was both proportionate and non-discriminatory
He just likes signing things, being "the man". Likes the sound of his own name.
He's the new Craig David.
which only reinforces the fact that Trumps original ban was both proportionate and non-discriminatory
How many people from countries on the list have been involved in terrorism in the US?
Did he completely underestimate how long it takes to work stuff out that he needs to reset the clock?
Is his new ban within the constitution?
You would have thought he could have figured all this out if he wasn't off playing golf every weekend.
Interesting to see the exec order has apparently been ready for a week now but held back in order to try and ride the positive wave from the speech guess they know that has left the building looking for elvis at this point.
What is jail time for perjury these days...
which only reinforces the fact that Trumps original ban was both proportionate and non-discriminatory
😆
it took him 40 days to realize that Iraq is full of oil , and US companies have invested millions to exploit it and without the Iraqi gov on board , they would loose a lot of $ .
Look at it another way, as a result of his ban, Iraq has now agreed to vetting and information sharing requirements, meaning that it has been removed from the list
That's just a fig leaf to cover up the fact that the US needs Iraq's help to combat ISIS.
- which only reinforces the fact that Trumps original ban was both proportionate and non-discriminatory
It's a fig leaf. It tries to cover up Trump's incompetence but that's about it.
And also from some of the quotes from the press launch (cause that's what policy announcements are these days) its all coming straight from the create problem (that doesn't exist) propose solutions...
"unregulated and unvetted travel" if only they had some sort of border and immigration services to deal with it.
One of the key parts to the original was it needed doing right now to stop the bad people coming in, the halt to the ban meant all the bad people would get in, now the bad people have a week to get in... How exactly is that not a complete logic fail?
Yet, as if by magic, Iraq [b]have[/b] now agreed to vetting and data sharing as requested.
Yet, as if by magic, Iraq have now agreed to share data as requested.
Do you think he could have asked them to?
No answer to all the other questions ninfan? There are a lot of them really.
Wonder if uber are doing a discount code for bad dudes (valid 7 days only)
mikewsmith - Member
How many people from countries on the list have been involved in terrorism in the US?
Irrelevant whether they are terrorists or not just like Israeli are banned from Muslim countries.
Why is this even a concern if he knows or if he does not know.Did he completely underestimate how long it takes to work stuff out that he needs to reset the clock?
Challenge the ban if it is not so how hard can that be ...Is his new ban within the constitution?
You would have thought he could have figured all this out if he wasn't off playing golf every weekend.
Everyone is learning but eventually everything will fall in place.
What's wrong with holding back? Nobody wants to be on the losing side so trying to ride the positive wave is normal for ALL politicians ...Interesting to see the exec order has apparently been ready for a week now but held back in order to try and ride the positive wave from the speech guess they know that has left the building looking for elvis at this point.
When is the last time a President is jailed in the land of the free? That will not happen coz America will not permit it. American will be a bunch of arses if they jail their President. 😆What is jail time for perjury these days...
mikewsmith - Member
How exactly is that not a complete logic fail?
You expect logic from the current US administration?
Or perhaps the real question is what is logic according to you. i.e. you see logic when it fits you?colournoise - Member
mikewsmith - Member
How exactly is that not a complete logic fail?
You expect logic from the current US administration?
If he wants to keep America safe he should kick all Americans out of the country and then introduce a travel ban on all Americans travelling to America. That'll learn em.
[quote=ninfan ]Trumps original ban was both proportionate and non-discriminatory
Indeed - and as he said at the time:
"If the ban were announced with a one week notice, the "bad" would rush into our country during that week. A lot of bad "dudes" out there!"
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/826060143825666051
chewkw - Member
Or perhaps the real question is what is logic according to you. i.e. you see logic when it fits you?
If the glove fits...
Indeed - and as he said at the time:"If the ban were announced with a one week notice, the "bad" would rush into our country during that week. A lot of bad "dudes" out there!"
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/826060143825666051
So what - he's still put the ban in place, ban is better than no ban, Trump wins, again.
what you don't recognise is the inherent use of psychological anchors - The outcome is more important than the offer.
ninfan -So what - he's still put the ban in place, ban is better than no ban, Trump wins
Well, unless that ban is seen as a deliberate and unjust act against Muslims, which results in the radicalisation of some Muslims already living the usa, who then organise a terror attack un-checked by this new 'ban'.....
Well, unless that ban is seen as a deliberate and unjust act against Muslims, which results in the radicalisation of some Muslims already living the usa, who then organise a terror attack un-checked by this new 'ban'.....
Which only goes to prove how much of a threat 'muslims' are and that Trump was not only right to impose a ban, but that he probably didn't go far enough, as a result of the democratic opposition fighting against it.
Not only that - but if the reaction of 'Muslims' to a ban that affects less than 15% of muslims is to go and start murdering people, then really it only underlines the fundamental incompatibility of muslim society with western liberal democracy.
Brilliant, isn't it?
Perhaps he should come up with some sort of plan, or solution, that er, finally gets rid of Muslims for once and for all. Wonder what he could call such a plan?????
The ban is only for 90 days, it's a well-known fact that terrorists have a very short attention span and get very bored very quickly. 90 days should definitely do it.
He's smart this Donald Trump, he certainly knows how to make America safe again. Or at least make halfwits feel safe.
Not only that - but if the reaction of 'Muslims' to a ban that affects less than 15% of muslims is to go and start murdering people, then really it only underlines the fundamental incompatibility of muslim society with western liberal democracy.Brilliant, isn't it?
Then again, some white guy with an irrational hatred of Muslims and access to a molecular biology lab might be pushed by Trumps order to go all 12 Monkeys on us and release a weaponized influenza virus.
Some Muslim whackjob won't be the end of us, it'll be some first world well educated white nutjob.
Come to think of it, disallowing Muslims from entering probably makes this kind of attack the much more likely method - plenty of good biologists left in Syria and Iraq. As others have said, terrorists don't always have short attention spans.
ninfan - MemberTrump wins, again.
Posted 11 minutes ago
He just keeps on winning.....
ninfan - Memberhe probably didn't go far enough, as a result of the democratic opposition fighting against it.
Posted 5 minutes ago
😆
maxtorque - Member
Well, unless that ban is seen as a deliberate and unjust act against Muslims, which results in the radicalisation of some Muslims already living the usa, who then organise a terror attack un-checked by this new 'ban'.....
Deliberate or not it is irrelevant coz many people are banned all over the world. Non-issue.
Okay let's try your logic so there is a ban therefore people will now become radicalise because they disagree with the ban, then they want to start terrorising others ... hmmm ...
There are nearly 320 million Americans with many of them armed to hilt ... guess who will suffer if the locals start kicking off? Do you think the America is going to pussy foot? They will practically quarantine them en-mass if they wish to ...
Are you trying a leading answer?maxtorque - Member
Perhaps he should come up with some sort of plan, or solution, that er, finally gets rid of Muslims for once and for all. Wonder what he could call such a plan?????
ninfan - Member
he probably didn't go far enough, as a result of the democratic opposition fighting against it.
Or as a result of the constitution you know the bit the red neck racists (and general intolerents) hide behind all the time. It goes both ways.
You would have to assume that after all the shouting, tweets and tantrums about the courts he is still yet to find a lawyer who can defend his original policy. Wonder if the legal expert (trying to remember what perjury means Sessions) had any input on this one.
Tom_W1987 - Member
Come to think of it, disallowing Muslims from entering probably makes this kind of attack the much more likely method - plenty of good biologists left in Syria and Iraq. As others have said, terrorists don't always have short attention spans.
The first rule about America is not to scare the American unless you can wipe America off the map in one go, otherwise if they retaliate they retaliate like a machine.
The retaliation has been going so well for them recently
chewkw
Do you think the America is going to pussy foot? They will practically [b]quarantine them en-mass[/b] if they wish to ...
chewkw
Are you trying a leading
answer?
It seems i don't even need to try, Chewy, you already said it for me.
and just to remember those left wing hand wringers at the Department of Homeland Security wrote/reported
“country of citizenship is unlikely to be a reliable indicator of potential terrorist activity.”
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2017/02/25/country-citizenship-not-likely-indicator-terroristic-threat-report-says/nUOokOFir9gJhqFfwNFq3L/story.html
As with most things Trump it's a long way from honest, truthful or possibly legal.
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
2,648 Dead and counting in 2017. The real issue.
[quote
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
2,648 Dead and counting in 2017. The real issue.
[img] 
[/img]
aracer - Member
The retaliation has been going so well for them recently
You call that retaliation? That is like American picking their own nose ... 😆
Of course the American will apply their "engineering rational" like a well oiled machine when it comes to dealing with threats. Unless you disagree with the precision of engineering rationale? 😛maxtorque - Member
It seems i don't even need to try, Chewy, you already said it for me.
Of course the American will apply their "engineering rational" like a well oiled machine when it comes to dealing with threats. Unless you disagree with the precision of engineering rationale?
The president has claimed that they have no idea what is going on, have unchecked immigration and that he really needs a lot more time to work it all out. To me that isn't a well oiled machine is it. So either he is talking out of his arse or you are 😉
ernie_lynch - Memberhttp://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
2,648 Dead and counting in 2017. The real issue.
320 million people and you are concerned with that 2,648?
That's [b]0.0008%[/b] of the population with majority probably drugs and gangs related ... 😯
Question you need to ask yourself.
Which kills more religion or guns?
Question you need to ask yourself.Which kills more religion or guns?
Guns
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/03/us/terrorism-gun-violence/
(These stats includ 9/11) 2001-2014 Guns 440,095 Terrorism 3,412
According to a September 2016 study released by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, some 3,024 Americans died from 1975 through 2015 at the hands of foreign-born terrorists. That number includes the 9/11 terrorist attacks (2,983 people) and averages nearly 74 Americans per year.Since 9/11, however, six Americans have died per year at the hands, guns, and bombs of foreign-born terrorists.
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/death-risk-statistics-terrorism-disease-accidents-2017-1?r=US&IR=T
The results flip Trump’s rationale on its head.Compared to the threat posed by a refugee terrorist — which the president’s executive order is specifically designed to curtail — the data suggest the typical American is:
6 times more likely to die from a shark attack (one of the rarest forms of death on Earth)
29 times more likely to die from a regional asteroid strike
260 times more likely to be struck and killed by lightning
4,700 times more likely to die in an aeroplane or spaceship accident
129,000 times more likely to die in a gun assault
407,000 times more likely to die in a motor vehicle incident
6.9 million times more likely to die from cancer or heart disease
https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_AmericanTerrorismDeaths_FactSheet_Oct2015.pdf
I think that one is conclusive there beyond any dobut. In fact the total number of fatalities from 9/11 will probably be reached before the middle of the month. Sobering isn't it.
mikewsmith - Member
The president has claimed that they have no idea what is going on, have uncheck immigration and that he really needs a lot more time to work it all out. To me that isn't a well oiled machine is it. So either he is talking out of his arse or you are
President Trump might not speak like a precision machine but America is.
The opponents should consider themselves lucky he is human otherwise they will have a hell of a heavy hammering for at least 8 years. At the moment, President Trump's opponents are getting away with only having slap on the wrists.
The only people talking out of their logic are those losing opponents, coz they simply cannot accept the logic that the President does not think like them. 😆
😆mikewsmith - Member
Question you need to ask yourself.
Which kills more religion or guns?
Guns
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/03/us/terrorism-gun-violence/
(These stats includ 9/11) 2001-2014 Guns 440,095 Terrorism 3,412
I am afraid that line of argument is so flawed the rational really does not make sense ...
Can knife kill? After all there are people that are stabbed to death ...
How about cars? Can car kill? Surely there are people killed by cars?
How about those trucks with explosive ... can trucks kill?
(These stats includ 9/11) 2001-2014 Guns 440,095 Terrorism 3,412
320 million population with number of guns about the same or 50% more than the population, which in a grand scheme of things, the death rate should be crazy high yet majority death are attributed to people who are influenced by drugs or some weird thoughts. The logic simply does not stack up. 🙄
[quote=mikewsmith ]So either he is talking out of his arse or you are
You're ruling out the "both" option? 😕
Oh hang on, I get it, you're suggesting that chewy [b]is[/b] Trump's arse?
[quote=chewkw ]Can knife kill? After all there are people that are stabbed to death ...
How about cars? Can car kill? Surely there are people killed by cars?
How about those trucks with explosive ... can trucks kill?
Explain to me how religion kills.
You're ruling out the "both" option?Oh hang on, I get it, you're suggesting that chewy is Trump's arse?
Not really but it would confuse our binary thinkers.
See above with the difficulty understanding which number is the bigger one. The fact bender is going to blow trying to make them align with the opinions on this one.
I'd seriously also expect a decent legal challenge in the courts before the weekend on the ban and the AG not being around to see it all through.
aracer - Member
Explain to me how religion kills.
Aha, you should ask those (being influenced) who are prepared to kill shouldn't you. 🙄
mikewsmith - Member
Not really but it would confuse our binary thinkers.
See above with the difficulty understanding which number is the bigger one. It fact bender is going to blow trying to make them align with the opinions on this one.
Or you can say that the confusion is on the complicated thinkers who are confused.
2001-2014 Guns 440,095 Terrorism 3,412
Like I say there are nearly 320 million people in America now.
That number of death means nothing in the grand scheme of things because the population growth is so scarily fast soon the world will limit the number of children a family can have ... 🙄
[b]Between 2000 and 2010 the American population grew by 27 million ...[/b] Feed them ...
[url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_States ]Wiki "facts" here.[/url]
Please don't make those sort of comments coz I cannot response. i.e. describing body parts. 😆 I just have too many good responses to that ... you know like sitting on something ... you guess. 😆aracer - Member
Oh hang on, I get it, you're suggesting that chewy is Trump's arse?
Like I say there are nearly 320 million people in America now.
That number of death means nothing in the grand scheme of things because the population growth is so scarily fast soon the world will limit the number of children a family can have ...
So if 440,095 deaths don't matter as they are just noise (they are all still people) what does it say about the 3,412? Are they not worth worrying about too? That seems to be your point doesn't it - It's 0.77% of the shooting deaths since 1975. Hence we get to a logic fail, if one is a massive problem the other should be. If the bigger number isn't a problem how can the one that is less than 1% be a problem.
Yes this is why you don't engage the troll isn't it...
[quote=mikewsmith ]Yes this is why you don't engage the troll isn't it...
You'll find I give chewy's posts [b]exactly[/b] the level of respect they deserve.
Diamond & Silk - self styled Trump supporters speak the truth with Evan Davis, [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39186644 ]Nothing but the truth, the whole truth and no bigly lies.....no siree Jim bob, god bless America [/url]
mikewsmith - Member
So if 440,095 deaths don't matter as they are just noise (they are all still people) what does it say about the 3,412? Are they not worth worrying about too? That seems to be your point doesn't it - It's 0.77% of the shooting deaths since 1975.
Nope, death is death the bottom line is this.
American is merely trying to prevent death their own ways.
Therefore, America can ban whoever they want as they see fit, their country, their rules and their rationale.
You are no more rational than the red necks you so despise.
[quote=chewkw ]You are no more rational than the red necks you so despise.
He's debating with you - good point
So what - he's still put the ban in place, ban is better than no ban, Trump wins, again.what you don't recognise is the inherent use of psychological anchors - The outcome is more important than the offer.
So let's see. The last attempt ended in failure because it just caused absolute chaos, stamped down on people who wouldn't be a threat to a mouse, was deemed illegal and achieved nothing except keeping Chump in the news and making his supporters feel a bit better.
It lasted 40 days during which nothing of the promised "figuring out" went on.
It also encouraged an atmosphere in which lunatics went around shooting non-white people who were told they should "go back to their own country".
Chump's reaction to all this mayhem and failure?
Knock Iraq off the list and do it again.
My conclusion is that Chump's actions are defended by halfwits who couldn't think their way out of a paper bag.
No offense.
My conclusion is that Chump's actions are defended by halfwits who couldn't think their way out of a paper bag.
I'd go wet paper bag, most are using the say it 3 times and it's true idea too.
The worse part is it's actually ineffective along with being damaging to the rest of the world and the US's reputaion. The rise of Islamaphobia is going to be the biggest issue the west needs to deal with, it bears a lot of the same signs of the Anti Semitic behavoiours people keep going on about. Religion is not terrorism, nationality does not make you a terrorist.
Actions like this simply feed the recruiters more angry people to manipulate and indoctrinate.
The issue with the ban is Trump himself..... throughout the campaign (and since) he's been calling it a "muslim ban".
Something is discriminatory if the intent is to discriminate. The Donald announced that this was the ban's purpose from the word go - to be a travel ban discriminating against Muslims. Therefore, it's unconstitutional.
Clumsily re-branding the same thing as "a ban of people from countries where there is terrorism" doesn't alter it's already highly publicised purpose - it might fool a few (stupid) people, but it's essentially the same thing, with the same intent.
Instead of calling it a "muslim ban" throughout his campaign, if he had called it "a ban of people from countries where there is terrorism" - we wouldn't be having all this fuss..... but then again, all of his bigoted racist supporters wouldn't have lapped it up in the way they did.
Maybe Trump could get someone to post absolute nonsense on Internet forums, to get people to waste their time engaging in pointless discussions. Maybe he could call this someone... ooh ... let's say "chewkw " for example.
Trump getting rid of obamacare will probably kill more people in America than terrorism this year, but at least he's managed to put a tax break for insurance ceo's in there. Really helping the little people eh?