The 9th will likely agree with judge Robart. Then it goes to the supreme's. we have eight judges on the supreme court with a best case scenario being l evenly split. Kennedy is as always worrisome and a relatively liberal. A best case is a split court which won't reverse the ruling. Trumps only hope lies with the 9th circuit as i see it.

^^^^^^^^^
That is as evident and plain as "...shall not be infringed". What aren't Lib-tards getting about the President's authority??

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
^^^^^^^^^
That is as evident and plain as "...shall not be infringed". What aren't Lib-tards getting about the President's authority??

They don't get that he's actually the President.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
^^^^^^^^^
That is as evident and plain as "...shall not be infringed". What aren't Lib-tards getting about the President's authority??

They don't get that he's actually the President.

HA, nicely done.

The Left's 'un-American' Smear

Only a "progressive" worldview is deemed patriotic by the Left.

When leftists take a torch to Old Glory, take a knee for the National Anthem or take an apology tour around the world, they’re lauded as heroes of free speech. But when a Republican president does something leftists don’t like, he’s “un-American.”

This is the latest slur the Left is hurling at President Trump as a result of his recent executive order implementing a temporary travel ban. Incidentally, this order is worth a moment of consideration both for what it does and does not do. As we previously noted, despite leftist hysteria, the ban is not what the Left claims. In fact, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama also enacted temporary bans.

But what a difference an election makes. What under Obama was a noble endeavor to protect Americans under Trump is suddenly “un-American.” Hence, liberals from academia to Hollywood to government are donning robes of patriotism to denounce the president. Morehouse College professor David Dennis Jr., for example, called New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady’s support of Trump “far more threatening to America than taking a knee during the National Anthem” because Trump is — per Dennis — the consummate “un-American.”

Then, there’s Hollywood. At the recent Screen Actors Guild Awards, Julia Louis-Dreyfus took to the podium and announced Trump is “un-American” because of the “immigrant ban.” And Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said Trump’s actions “are so un-American it pains us all.”

Four states — Washington, Massachusetts, New York and Virginia — are even suing the Trump administration over the order, with New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman calling it “unconstitutional, unlawful and fundamentally un-American.” This is the same guy, by the way, who unlawfully went after Exxon Mobil and other “aggressive climate deniers.”

Of course, the “un-American” attribution is hardly limited to immigration issues. The Left likes to slap this label on anyone who disagrees with their views. Are you pro-life? No, you’re “anti-American,” said NARAL president Ilyse Hogue. (That whole “right to life” thing in the Declaration of Independence must be pretty un-American to Hogue, too.) Do you believe boys should actually pee in boys' restrooms? You’re not rational. You’re “un-American.” Do you oppose the government-takeover of the health care industry? You’re not pro-freedom, you’re “un-American.”

For those who seem so ready, willing and able to identify what makes someone “un-American,” it’s amazing how little they understand about what makes someone “American.”

Contrary to the Sandra Flukes of the world, being American doesn’t mean free condoms for all. Nor does it mean free health care. It doesn’t mean safe spaces or safety pins, government-mandated school lunch menus or free cell phones. It doesn’t mean free college tuition or a guaranteed job upon graduation. It doesn’t mean gender identity affirmation or global citizenship. It doesn’t mean the right to kill a child or the right to make some one else pay for you to do it.

And, despite what the Left is crying, being American doesn’t mean demanding indiscriminately open borders.

As Michelle Malkin explains, “America’s Founding Fathers … asserted their concerns publicly and routinely about the effects of indiscriminate mass immigration.” James Madison, for example, stated, “It is no doubt very desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for the worthy part of mankind to come and settle amongst us, and throw their fortunes into a common lot with ours. But why is this desirable? Not merely to swell the catalogue of people. No, sir, it is to increase the wealth and strength of the community; and those who acquire the rights of citizenship, without adding to the strength or wealth of the community are not the people we are in want of.”

Indeed, being American actually means embracing the ideals that men and women, far braver than some Hollywood talking heads, have given their lives for, by the tens of thousands over the last 250 years. The ideals of personal responsibility and industry; the belief in the equality of all men based not on government dicta but on the reality of a Creator; the freedom to do not whatever you want but whatever is right.

Leftists can toss around accusations of “un-Americanism” as long as they’d like. But until they demonstrate that they understand what it means to be American, their attempts at contrast will continue to fall flat.

https://patriotpost.us/articles/47229

Just listened to President Trump's short speech from MacDill AFB. I must admit I got a little emotional when he finished because his speech wasn't all about "I I I me me me". It was about "us us us we we we" and makes me realize how close to the edge of utter failure and catastrophe this Republic came.

God BLESS America and make her great again!!

Since when is it necessary to avoid irreparable harm to every citizen and entity before exercising a power granted to the President by Congress?

Is it necessary to show no harm to anyone when Congress votes a law and the President signs it?

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Since when is it necessary to avoid irreparable harm to every citizen and entity before exercising a power granted to the President by Congress?

Is it necessary to show no harm to anyone when Congress votes a law and the President signs it?

The answer to you (rhetorical) question is a resounding NO.

Life is not without risk, nor pain, nor loss.

Without risk, you have no life, you have a static idol, without eyes, without heart without soul.

Certainly life has pain, but it can and often is hevily layerd with joy, and love and many great things we know as life.

I choose life, and all it brings.

Apparently some of the press is so far ahead of reality that Joe Scarborough, for instance, is demanding a statement from President Trump that he opposes assassinating journalists and rivals. LINK

Talk about spun up. I am just not sure the President will apologize for things he never said or thought. But, that tactic has been used by the press for a long time to make up a narrative it wants to pursue.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
Is it necessary to show no harm to anyone when Congress votes a law and the President signs it?

No, but it would be nice to consistently see evidence that they at least considered the ramifications, no matter the particular subject at hand. All too often it seems as though it never crossed their minds, much less the financial implications.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
here is what we are up against in CA:

http://www.breitbart.com/calif...cuments-deportation/

California State Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De Léon (D-Los Angeles) said last Tuesday that “half his family” was in the country illegally, using false documents, and eligible for deportation under President Trump’s new executive order against “sanctuary” jurisdictions.

"… I can tell you half of my family would be eligible for deportation under [President Donald Trump’s] executive order, because if they got a false Social Security card, if they got a false identification, if they got a false driver’s license prior to us passing AB60, if they got a false green card, and anyone who has family members, you know, who are undocumented knows that almost entirely everybody has secured some sort of false identification. That’s what you need to survive, to work. They are eligible for massive deportation."

Seems to me that this information should be forwarded to AG, and ICE!!

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
here is what we are up against in CA:

http://www.breitbart.com/calif...cuments-deportation/

California State Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De Léon (D-Los Angeles) said last Tuesday that “half his family” was in the country illegally, using false documents, and eligible for deportation under President Trump’s new executive order against “sanctuary” jurisdictions.

"… I can tell you half of my family would be eligible for deportation under [President Donald Trump’s] executive order, because if they got a false Social Security card, if they got a false identification, if they got a false driver’s license prior to us passing AB60, if they got a false green card, and anyone who has family members, you know, who are undocumented knows that almost entirely everybody has secured some sort of false identification. That’s what you need to survive, to work. They are eligible for massive deportation."

then they should be rounded up and tossed out

thanks for letting us know

we real American's appreciate it

have a really nice day

to add to Kevin De Leon's apprehension:

from

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the...fety-interior-united

Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States

Sec. 5. Enforcement Priorities.

(d) Have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency;

(e) Have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits;

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
^^^^^^^^^
That is as evident and plain as "...shall not be infringed".

I've always hated this argument. The Second Amendment is one of the worst written. How many times has the Supreme Court had to clarify that the RTKBA is an individual right and not limited to *militias*?

This is interesting.
The recent Washington state federal ruling doesn't cover everything, take a look.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...0000-limit-refugees/

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
^^^^^^^^^
That is as evident and plain as "...shall not be infringed".

I've always hated this argument. The Second Amendment is one of the worst written. How many times has the Supreme Court had to clarify that the RTKBA is an individual right and not limited to *militias*?

The language itself couldn't be clearer. The problem lies with each and every person and judge who has screwed it up since it was written. Nowhere else in the Constitution is the language more clear... WTF else could "shall not be infringed" mean beyond the obvious?

Nothing, that's what.

Speaking of the Presidential election in the US and the post-Brexit atmosphere in Britain Piers Morgans says that what we're seeing is "one of the great hissy fits of modern political times."

Yep...I watched that...CNN has to hate Piers I think he was spot on on his take on hillary as a candidate as well as obama...the MSM helped launch Trump with nonstop coverage and had no idea what to do with the "monster" they helped create and perpetuate.

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
^^^^^^^^^
That is as evident and plain as "...shall not be infringed".

I've always hated this argument. The Second Amendment is one of the worst written. How many times has the Supreme Court had to clarify that the RTKBA is an individual right and not limited to *militias*?

As many times as the liberal idiots keeping taking their case to the SCOTUS.

In my world, there is no ambiguity in the 2A. Stands by itself.