The detentions prompted legal challenges as lawyers representing two Iraqis held at Kennedy Airport filed a writ of habeas corpus early Saturday in the Eastern District of New York seeking to have their clients released. At the same time, they filed a motion for class certification, in an effort to represent all refugees and immigrants who they said were being unlawfully detained at ports of entry.
Mr. Trump’s order, which suspends entry of all refugees to the United States for 120 days, created a legal limbo for individuals on the way to the United States and panic for families who were awaiting their arrival.
Mr. Trump’s order also stops the admission of refugees from Syria indefinitely, and it bars entry into the United States for 90 days from seven predominantly Muslim countries linked to concerns about terrorism. Those countries are Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.
Via Drudge: more at this link
52 comments:
Should have been done years ago.
Just shows what happens when you have an American as POTUS rather than a communist Moslem.
Trump stops the Muslim invasion! The most important action he's taken.
I like he is giving preferences to Christians and religious minorities.
The left is going nuts!
Next step, deport the ones who are already here.
Is there a difference between being cautious and cruel? Or is it just easier to make no distinction?
He should give preference to religious minorities. Half of this I like. Half I wonder if is just a way to pretend that we're doing something that we really haven't had all that much of a problem with since George read about a pet goat and watched planes crash into tall buildings.
Let him do this. Let him also be urged to stop blowing off the intelligence agencies.
7 countries with "concerns about terrorism." Just seven? How about Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE, where the 911 hijackers came from?
Or is Trump going to be just as cozy with the Saudis as all his Republican predecessors were?
Somalis are pretty. Too bad about the terrorism thing. I thought they tended to make better pirates than hijackers, though?
Good thing Ayaan Hirsi Ali isn't Somali, right? You never how much terrorism she might participate in or inspire.
It's a start.
How about Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE, where the 911 hijackers came from?
Step 1: Find Dictionary
Step 2: Look up word "Refugee"
Step 3: Enlighten yourself
Step 4: Come back and act all uppity because someone had to explain to you the topic on which you were commenting, and it is the internet, so you have the right to continue being an idiot and making a fool of yourself and that's exactly what you will do.
So instead of explaining yourself Leland you arrogantly bring up some different point without reference to anything but the dictionary. That's just about as incoherent a response as I should expect from a lightweight like you, so I hope you feel proud to have made it.
Refugees aren't coming from Saudi Arabia. But maybe we should include them too for consistency sakes.
I find something off, something I can't quite put my finger on. But let me see if you guys can clarify for me.
Liberals for years have been saying that the Muslim religion has nothing to do with terrorism. Right?
So now when Trump trying to curb terrorism temporarily bans refugees from certain countries which in the past have produced both terror and refugees - liberals respond with all Muslims cries of discrimination.
Didn't they say the Muslim religion has nothing to do with terrorism?
Which is it?
So we're concerned about an inflow of refugees but not about foreign nationals in general?
Interesting.
Trump has the authority to act on refugees, and he did. Just like Obama did when he decided to let the refugees come in the first place, except from Cuba, which he decided he didn't want those people since they weren't voting for him.
Lem, if liberals were consistent, we wouldn't need Trump as President. Heck if liberals were actually liberal, we wouldn't need Trump or the GOP.
I would like to see Trump reverse that Cuba decision... and not just on the refugees.
He's doing what he said he would do if elected. Pause, make sure the system is secure. Common sense to me.
I wonder if The Terminal is available on the inflight movie selections.
I agree that we should limit contact with Saudi Arabia. Anything bad we can do to them is good in my book.
Egypt is our client state and President Trump is going to develop them as spear point to defeat radical Islam. He is going to designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. The current Egyptian President came to power by smashing the Muslim Brotherhood so he will be on board with whatever we do. He is the first of the compliant dictators we are going to set up just like the old days when Ike was in charge. He can vet the immigrants and visas from his end. No problem.
Pakistan is more difficult. The most difficult in fact. A nuclear power they have to be handled carefully.
The UAE is in the same boat as the Saudi's. Let's screw with them and bankrupt them. When the two pipelines and domestic drilling is up and running we can run them into the ground. We can team up with Russia to do that. They have their own oil to sell. Lets give them a better price and stick it to the camel jockeys.
Lem, if liberals were consistent
The world is not consistent. Reality is not consistent. Fucking deal with it.
And if Drumpf's policy was consistent, he'd also include Saudis, Pakistanis, and other nationals from the countries to which he has business ties. But I seem to notice one consistent thread running through Drumpf's acts: When he has a business interest in someone or something dangerous to the country, somehow his whole "America First" talk goes out the window. That's consistent - he's all in it for himself.
Drumpf and his minions here are worried about us turning into France or Germany. Don't worry, that won't happen. We have guns to scare them off, at least when not aiming them on kindergartners.
Like everything else the guy does, there's a tiny kernel of long-overdue good intentions and a whole mess of sloppy over-reaction. Whatever led to 9/11 should have been dealt with by now. San Bernardino become the retros' rallying cry, but that was not event very dissimilar to what tons of "native born" non-Muslim Americans do all the time. But I get it, weapons are good - so it's forbidden to investigate that angle there or in Orlando. Nope, go the anti-Muslim way. Christian Americans can kill as many as they want, as long as the caliber is right and the ammunition plentiful. To deny them that would detract from whatever this is all about.
It makes us look scared and weak to over-react this way. A tighter, country-specific moratorium is fine and it's clever and interesting to see how they'll try to tie it into the countries' own vetting and visa issuance policies. But there are a lot of Kurds in Iraq. Already there is pushback from the military about how this affects those who've put their lives on the line fighting for this country. And ever sadder stories about just decent folks, many who were sponsored assets to research institutions etc. and beyond. And then there was the sloppiness about no announcement beforehand and fuck anybody who just happened to get on a plane too late before it could be re-routed. But I get it. Hey, let's fight the good fight. For Merkel's and the E.U.'s sake.
Whatever.
Trump is showing you what a real leader can do when he is no off playing golf or getting blowjobs or choking on a pretzel. You see a problem. You try to fix it. You don't need endless studies and navel gazing the approval of some douchebag liberal PHD. You throw shit against the wall to see what sticks. If it doesn't work you try something else.
Real leaders of both liberal and conservative stripes did this. Andrew Jackson. James J Polk. Lincoln. FDR. Reagan. To name just a few.
Trump can learn from each of them and take their best ideas.
Trash the banks and take stuff like the pipeline from the Indians the way Jackson did.
Smack around the Mexicans the way Polk did.
Suspend Habeas corpus and shut down newspapers the way Lincoln did.
Start a massive building program and put America back to work smacking around the Krauts and the Japs with the Russians help.
Lowering taxes and torturing the left the way Reagan did.
The path is clear. The God Emperor of the Cherry Blossom Throne will not disappoint us.
It's gonna be yuge!
You see a problem. You try to fix it.
But I'm not sure he really, clearly sees a problem. He jumps on whatever O'Reilly bellows at him that night - like sending in Feds to big cities?
Immigration policy is complex. Did you read the order? It was pages and pages and pages long. I think Trump even said his business dealings were too "complex" to sever completely. His business too complex to put into a blind trust like he should have. Exemptions, exemptions, exemptions when it comes to Mr. Trump! That's complexity, as far as I see it - constantly making an excuse for oneself. No simple way to be on every side of every fence.
Andrew Jackson's the most apt metaphor. What purpose did the Trail of Tears serve? What purpose did the Japanese internment serve? Have we not learned from history?
Islam's a more complex problem, and one with a longstanding beef against us - going back all the way to 1784. They're a special case, no doubt about it. But the balance must be sophisticated. They're a world religion not an indigenous population or a hell-bent kamikazee nation state. We need to empower those within it to keep trusting and fighting with us and against the rest of them, which we do both militarily and diplomatically. This is a bit of a monkey wrench into all that.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not sure it's the worst thing or that something along these lines needed to be done. But let's cut to the chase - this is a religious culture war salvo in a struggle that is much more Europe's problem at this point than it really is ours. And the way we've treated Muslims who've put their lives and fortunes on the line for us in this struggle is downright shameful. Just whose loyalty do we prefer them to have.
Maybe if he'd worked out something with his friends the Saudis where they could have become the primary refuge for Muslims from 7 sometimes war-torn nations.... But I doubt this will give them the message, either.
I sure hope it works, because right now it's sounding more like an emotion in search of a policy. We do need unity and to come together as a nation but it's sad that people think it can only start (and probably end) with things like this.
Typo: "I'm not sure it's the worst thing or that something along these lines didn't need to be done."
Lowering taxes and torturing the left the way Reagan did.
Precisely the time during which outsourcing our manufacturing and raping the American worker started taking off full steam, for some ironic reason.
"Precisely the time during which outsourcing our manufacturing and raping the American worker started taking off full steam, for some ironic reason."
Which is why Trump is doing the opposite in fighting to bring back American Jobs. By lowering taxes and putting on tariffs he makes it more attractive to make things in the USA. By lowering taxes he will have funds repatriated to America from Ireland and other tax havens.
Trump is no Reagan. He is not a conservative by any stretch of the imagination. He is more along the lines of a Truman/Eisenhower type that has long been gone from the political landscape.
Trump, or his minions, didn't actually pick the seven countries. Evidently that was done under Obama's DHS back in 2015.
"Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015" H/T Insty.
I do agree the timing of implementation on this EO was somewhat heavy handed. Especially if true that it includes green card holders being denied reentry, that seems pretty draconian unless there was a known threat of some sort. Then again, as noted above, sometimes you just need to do shit to get the ball rolling.
Sure wish Google would fix that preview function.
The tariff he's imposing on Mexico is I'm told structured in such a way as to tax American consumers of Mexican goods.
Let's see if lowering taxes brings American "funds" to America. I'm skeptical, though. It certainly doesn't sound like anything Reagan would have disagreed with.
The tariff is just the opening bid. A trial balloon if you will. The way a negotiation works is you ask for the moon at first....then you see what you can get. It will be in Mexico's best interest to work out a deal first instead of letting Trump run wild with ways to punish them.
Reagan was not against tariffs. He set up domestic content legislation to demand that a certain portion of cars sold in America were made in America. That was when Japan was the big bug-a-boo. Read the Tom Clancy novels of the time. It featured a trade war....and somebody flying a plane into the Capital Building in a suicide mission to destroy our government. Several years before 911.
Trump will do many things wrong. But he will do many things right. There is always a simple answer. It is not always right. Or more correctly not 100% right. But you don't sit on your ass and play golf. You try to get things done. You work with the Congress. He called them in to talk. He called in people very opposed to him like Romney and Al Gore. He will cut deals. He knows if you get 80% of what you want you are doing pretty good. Of course the professors and the press who never had to meet a payroll or make compromises to stay in business will piss and moan and call him out and call him a liar and a cheat.
Let me asks you something. Is he trying to keep his campaign promises or not? He has only been in a week and it feels like he has been the President for a year. He is using the fire house approach. He is spouting out change and orders and proposing changes and the media and the Demorats are like a dog trying to drink out of that hose. Sad.
Well that's because his approach is not all good. A war on the media is as much a distraction as it is a strategy and people rightly respond to that. His ego is a double-edged sword. I don't suppose his single-mindedness will be all bad, but it will cause some disasters too. We're saying the same thing. You seem to say people shouldn't focus on the number and details and heavy-handedness of his acts, but that's kind of hard to ignore or not respond to. He hates people not assuming the best in him, but doing that many things that quickly and that forcefully invites consideration. The people are not going to just go, "Ok whatever Trump does, it's great. His balls are so big! <B. No, they're going to react. The people on the hiring committee who did or did not go along with the hiring committee's decisions don't just get voted off. Keeping campaign promises gets him points for honesty. (Obama kept many of his campaign promises, too). But just being wily or strong-willed doesn't mean that everyone's going to accept that the acts are right.
X-Ray; I'm still trying to figure out the green-card thing. The EO available on the White House website covers Mexico and Refugees. My reading of some comments suggest that isn't the EO regarding the terrorists states, but I don't see anything else. What PJMedia reports is what a former counsel to the Obama Administration claims the EO may mean, which is meaningless. My reading of the EO is that it gives the Secretary of Homeland Security some authority that is otherwise granted to the AG by the law, and otherwise tells the Secretary of Homeland Security to enforce the written law. The written law and the EO are pretty specific about aliens that violated US immigration law or have not received admittance. The EO also mentions refugees, which I don't understand how a refugee would have a green card and then violated US immigration laws.
policy was consistent, he'd also include Saudis
So much wrong in just a few words here.
The policy doesn't exclude Saudis or Pakistanis or anyone else related to terrorism. Here's the policy. Immigration is controlled by Congress per a SCOTUS decision that relates to Congress Constitutional power regarding naturalization. Thus immigration law is set by Congressional action first and then signed by a President. An Executive Order is not a bill from Congress to sign into law. The law, which was recently revised by a bill passed by Congress in 2015 and signed by Obama, calls out the 7 states. Obama, after signing the law, decided to order that the law not be enforced, because I think he didn't understand his Oath of Office and Obama lacked consistency (and yeah, we all dealt with it for 8 years; so perhaps you can try 8 days?). Trump's EO essentially says, "DHS, go enforce the law as written". Trump can do that, because he has the authority to execute the laws of the United States which he may recall from his Oath of Office. Again, those laws doesn't include Saudi Arabia for this particular issue.
When there is that much wrong in just the first sentence of an argument; there really isn't any point in believing in rational discussion. Alas, your just banging on Step 4, which is as predictable as the pigeon playing chess knocking off the pieces, taking a dumb on the board, and strutting around like it owns the place.
Oh! So now Trump needs an executive order to enforce existing law! So clear! I guess that's why they marketed it to the public this way.
Pigeons do run the place. Watch what this bird can do.
So... just a matter of enforcing an existing law, and yet, even the media-attacking Chief Tantrum Thrower couldn't manage to make a point of that. (Was Twitter down?) Another public relations disaster by Team Trump. But who needs the American people with you when you can make so many dang enemies out of such a small thing. Making enemies is fun. Drama. Wheee! How's my hair?
The fights with the media is strategic. While the media is chasing squirrels about how he "lied" about things such as crowd size and illegal voters...they are not concentrating and attacking his substantive moves in things like the pipeline, freezing government hiring and freeing up the energy industry. He is doing so many things the dolts in the press can't handle it so they focus on trivialities because they are trivial people.
As far as expecting every one will think his acts are right....that is never in the cards for anyone. He has a rock solid 40% who are totally behind him. There is a rock solid 40% totally against him. The 20% in the middle are what is important.
Casey Stengel used to say that there were ten guys who loved the manager because they got to play. There were 10 guys who hated the manager because they didn't get to play. If you wanted to control the team you need to keep the five remaining guys on your side.
The people in the middle include the squishy Rhinos types who are scared of his twitter account right now. He can intimidate them and keep them in line. See Little Marco and his bogus attempt to not vote for Tillerson. The rest of the undecided are the low information types. If he can keep pointing to the lies that the media tells the low information voter is not going to get all excited about the press caterwauling about something. It becomes noise. They can't gang rape him the way they did to Bush. That is the reason for the war to the knife with the press. They are never going to be fair. So he doesn't have to be fair. He has to pump up the alternative media and offer a competing narrative that the low information voter can hang their red MAGA cap on.
That is why Spicer should call on the National Enquirer first in his next press conference.
Kellyanne and Bannon know what they are doing.
He has to use a Presidential memorandum to enforce existing law because Obama circumvented the law by executive fiat. That is what he did with DACA. That is what Obama did with catch and release. It is simply reversing the previous administrations directives.
If he just enforces the laws that are on the books he will be fine. What Obama did was have bureaucrats issue regulations that were contra to the law. That is why Obama has lost so many cases in the Courts.
Another example is funding for the wall. Some of the money had already been appropriated but Obama never used it. So he is going to go to Congress to get the rest and will shake it out of the beaners one way or another. The Congress will go along. At least the Republicans will or be at the mercy of a twitter blast that will run them out of office. They are cowards. Pissant cucks and Trump will steamroll them. Watch and see.
They are all Little Marcos.
I'm stocking up on avocados.
Trump needs an executive order to enforce existing law!
Nope. He didn't need it. He provided it to make it clear what he expects from the people who work for him, that's why its called an order.
Try this; go to a restaurant, stand there and do nothing, and then see what happens. After awhile, try placing an order, and see if things happen more to your liking. This isn't rocket scientist, but fortunately for you, I'm a rocket scientist so I can explain even that to you too.
This isn't rocket scientist
Apparently it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the saying is, "This isn't rocket science."
Leland, you flub and disappoint me. Again, your armchair lawyering/governmenting is impressive. But the public relations disaster of playing it off like some fiat thing does no one any good. Ask your other "rocket science" friends. 9 out 10 rocket scientists agree: If your executive order is a way to enforce a previously unenforced law, make that clear. Make that the centerpiece of your little P.R. coup. I know you hate the American people, but sometimes all that contempt for them gets so staged as to become self-defeating.
Other than that, bravo! I'm sure you'll make Sean Spicer proud. Are you able to chew and swallow 40 Orbit gum pieces in a day? While getting angry and saying what Trump believes are "facts" by virtue of his belief in them? Leland, we've got a job for you!
The "Wall" is self-defeating nonsense. Obama had a net deportation rate to Mexico that exceeded any entries.
Even Israel's "wall" is mostly fence. And they've got actual terrorists to keep out, not made-up "rapists, etc."
The wall is a monument to Trump's ego and need to erect big things with his name on them. It's the silliest of all his ideas, no matter how much it riles up the red meat machine. Marketing and reality are different things.
You're so easy to juice, Ritmo. Does it really make a difference if wall or fence if no one can go beyond it? You've really sucked in on the Marketing... of your mind, by progressive/globalist/socialist/communist thought. You need to wake up, you'd be better for it in doing so.
Leland, thanks for your further exploration of the EO on 'green cards'. I'll take a wait and see at this point.
If I was POTUS, I wouldn't have enacted a total ban from those countries, but set a limit of the number of immigrants from all countries. Such as Somalia = 2, Iran = 1...
Ok, so there is a different EO apparently, and oddly, it is not up at Whitehouse.gov. Legal Insurrection provided a link to CNN, which has a text of a different EO. The EO CNN has it is directed specifically to stopping terrorism, and is a bit more powerful, but again, it is mostly directing DHS to enforce a law signed by Obama. About the major thing Trump does is make some designations within the context of the law, which actually seem to already been a part of the law. To wit, here's a pull quote:
"I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order "
I haven't fully read this CNN EO yet for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, I'm concerned that I'm reading it on CNN and not Whitehouse.gov, which has published other EO's, including a new item marked 28 January (while CNN's EO says 27 January). Why doesn't the Whitehouse post this item? At the moment, to be fair to CNN and the Whitehouse; I'll assume some body is slow in updating the website at Whitehouse.gov. Another issue is that CNN's web advertisement makes reading the EO difficult. Finally, much of the advertisement includes links to other CNN articles that are opinions on the EO, apparently because most people who get their news from CNN need someone to tell them what they just read. As Trump does a good job of communicating around the media; I want to see what he has to say, and read it on the Whitehouse website.
Still; I'll grant that this EO is a bit more menacing, but considering its topic, terrorism, it should be.
You're so easy to juice, Ritmo. Does it really make a difference if wall or fence if no one can go beyond it? You've really sucked in on the Marketing... of your mind, by progressive/globalist/socialist/communist thought. You need to wake up, you'd be better for it in doing so.
LOLOL! Talk about easy to goose! Yes, we all know that right-wing bias is not really a form of bias. The billions (more?) spent on a whatever to keep the net outflow of deported Mexicans is really a top priority. Chop chop! Thanks for calling me a "globalist". I'm sure all your corporate Republicans have always been anti-free trade and will just jump on board with this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to go nativist since TRUMP will now win elections for them and not their donors - who BTW seem to comprise the majority of his cabinet. The swamp has been drained - OF DECENCY - and now you have a cabinet with a combined net worth of more than a third of America. Graft away, my friend. Graft away. Make sure Ben Carson does his best direct housing policy in ways that benefit his new master. Just think of it, Trump settling for a fence (which we already have) instead of a nice, big, stupendous tremendous beautiful wall. His fucking head would explode. Don't worry about global cabals; you have enough trouble understanding a single man.
Xray, et al;
From Legal Insurrection; I discovered that the EO posted at the WhiteHouse.gov is not the EO that is in the news (link goes to CNN text of EO). However, I can't find the other EO anywhere on WhiteHouse.gov or DHS.gov, the latter does have a response to the Judge issuing a stay against the EO, which is legal considering how many times Obama was stopped by the judicial branch. But the stay is just a stay, not a final ruling.
I'll also say that the EO available from CNN is much tougher (and definitely different) than what I found at WhiteHouse.gov. Still, its tough wording is completely consistent with the written law, much of the significant parts of that law having been signed in by Obama.
Of course, lots more questions: Why is the EO not posted at WhiteHouse.gov? Why does CNN say the EO pertains to 7 countries, yet the EO is actually silent on the 7 countries until you get to the law signed by Obama? Why do fact checkers think it was cool when Obama quietly enacted the law against only Iraq for 6 months, but absolutely tyranny when Trump enacts the law for 90 days without singling out countries not already singled out by the law? Why does the Press say it is only against Muslims, when the EO only says religious minorities? And a bunch more questions that come up after reading Legal Insurrection.
Why, why, why, indeed, Leland? Why is Trump a liar? Why did he trot out fake "files" at his first post-election press conference that detailed all the divestment he never really undertook? Can't be because the guy's a liar and a faker. He's as honest as they come.
Jesus Christ. I'm willing to give the guy a chance. Not to just blindly believe whatever the congenital liar says. I know, he covers himself by talking out of both sides of his mouth. But interestingly enough, most people don't consider that to be a form of "honesty."
I guess O'Reilly will have to explain it to them.
Yes, Leland, agree, lots of questions. And though I loathe quoting the NYTimes it appears there has been a Reversal of the Green Card ruling. I'll reiterate, though apparently a tad hasty with resulting corresponding glitches, Trump has done exactly what he campaigned on and what the voters who elected him expected him to do. The other side knows this as well, yet still chooses to get their panties in a wad. I don't care.
Ritmo, if you're open borders, an idea/l with which you seem to concur, then you're a globalist by definition.
As I said you never get 100% of what you want. The fact of the matter they should have made provision for green card holders and people already approved for visas that were in transit. But those people will be processed in the next few days.
What you can't do is send it out for studies and comments and watering down by the duopoly. Not if you want to accomplish anything. You do it and then fix the glitches.
Of course the media lies about this. The Trump administration did not pick these countries at the expense of Saudi Arabia. They used the countries previously designated by the Obama Administration and the Congress. They didn't add to it. They didn't do it on the basis of being a "Muslim" country since many majority Muslim countries like Indonesia, India and Pakistan were not included. These countries are basically failed states and the terror capital Iran. We can always tweek the list but saying it is a Muslim ban and that Trump excluded Saudi Arabia because of his business ties is just a flat out blatant lie by the media, the liberals, the Democrats and the people who think we should import more Muslim terrorists.
Ritmo, if you're open borders, an idea/l with which you seem to concur, then you're a globalist by definition.
First off, we don't have "open borders." No country does.
As far as less obsession on the southern border, I don't have a set opinion on that. But figure it represents a lot of xenophobia and not much else. Again, under Obama there's been a net negative rate of migration across that border. Will it really do as much as we need for the working class? Again, I doubt it. But I'm agnostic. If that's the trial balloon that far-right Republicans want to float in exchange for more focus on the working class, I'm willing to throw them that bone. But I don't have faith in much of what Trump's doing (highlighting attention to the causes of what he addresses, however, is a different issue). But we'll see. And I'm not going to just say that all his sloppy ham-fisted heaviness is ok because of the purity of the aim and the strength of his resolve. Oftentimes that matters just as much.
Yes XRay, Trump is doing exactly what he promised. Remember the last guy, who said day 1 he would shut down Gitmo and get us out of Iraq? Good times, good times.
Not to nitpick... "First off, we don't have "open borders." No country does.", but what is the EU, then, exactly.
Though I'll nitpick again... true, our Southern border is not precisely open, but it is damn sure porous enough for the distinction to little matter.
I don't know about anyone else, but xenophobia enters not into my thoughts on a secure border. I just want vetting, at least some knowledge of purpose, and then allowed or not.
I don't want another 9/11, or worse.
Leland. I'm somewhat surprised that the O did not shut down Gitmo. Especially after his re-election, when he had nothing to lose. Though he succeeded in pulling out of Iraq, leaving an utter fricking mess for someone else to clean up.
Xray, Obama pulled out of Iraq, and then put troops back into Iraq.
Anyway, the EO now posted at Whitehouse.gov
Thanks, Leland.
Post a Comment