Following a request from Congress, the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security has directed personnel to preserve all documents related to the implementation of President Donald Trump’s executive order barring travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries last weekend as part of an internal investigation into the order’s chaotic rollout, according to an internal document obtained by The Intercept.
In an agency-wide directive sent to DHS staff early Wednesday afternoon, the IG’s office wrote, “All agency personnel must preserve any document that contains information that is potentially relevant to OIG’s investigation, or that might reasonably lead to the discovery of relevant information relating to the implementation of this Executive Order. For the duration of this hold, any relevant information that is within your possession or control must be preserved in the exact form as it currently exists.”
The department’s IG office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the investigation.
The launch of the probe, headed by DHS Inspector General John Roth, follows calls from Illinois Sens. Tammy Duckworth and Dick Durbin earlier this week for a “comprehensive investigation” into the “chaotic execution” of the administration’s order, which separated families around the world and led to mass protests at multiple U.S. airports.
In a letter sent to Roth on Sunday, the lawmakers asked the IG’s office to investigate a number of issues related to the rollout of the order, including what guidance DHS and Customs and Border Protection personnel provided to the White House in developing the order and what directions were provided to CBP officers in implementing it.
The lawmakers also asked the IG to investigate whether CBP officers complied with subsequent court orders, and whether DHS and CBP officers kept a list of individuals that they detained at ports of entry.
Despite a Saturday night federal court order blocking all ban-related removals, and a series of subsequent legal challenges in a number of states, including one in Virginia mandating that lawyers be granted access to individuals arriving from affected countries, reports of noncompliance with the orders continued to spread in the following days.
Over the weekend, The Intercept reported on an Iranian citizen at Los Angeles International Airport forced by CBP officials to board a flight to Copenhagen, despite the nationwide stay. In New York, another Iranian woman was forced onto a flight to Ukraine despite the judge’s order. In a phone call with reporters Sunday, Becca Heller, director of the International Refugee Assistance Project, said “high-level intervention” was required to prevent the woman from being deported.
“They literally turned the plane around while it was taxiing on the tarmac and allowed her to leave,” Heller said.
In the following days, reports have also emerged of immigration officials making people sign forms renouncing their valid immigration status, sometimes through threats and manipulation.
On Sunday, DHS said in a statement that the department would continue to implement the executive order while also complying with court orders.
“We continue to face [CBP]’s noncompliance and chaos frankly at every airport across the country,” Marielena Hincapie, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, told reporters on Sunday. “The last 48 hours have been really full of chaos, the sense of the federal government completely deciding to not comply with the Constitution and on top of that, to not provide guidance to its field with respect to arriving immigrants and refugees.”
“We are grappling with their all-out rejection — on the one hand saying that they started to comply but on the ground seeing something very, very different,” she added. “The truth is that DHS’s messaging since this nationwide order continues to instill fear in communities and arriving immigrants and refugees.”
The ban was implemented inconsistently in airports across the country — with lawyers and Congress members unable to get answers from immigration officers on the ground.
“Every time we talked to [CBP] about one of these instances, they just told us they were awaiting a call from D.C. and finally stopped talking to us altogether and told us to call President Trump,” said Heller.
“It’s really clear that there’s really no method to this madness and that the fate of all these people is sort of up to the whim of how bold is the [CBP] port director for that airport willing to be,” she said. “Or it begs the question, are there directives coming from D.C. to target certain airports but not others?”
Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images
The nation’s top homeland security and immigration officials defended the execution of Trump’s order in a press conference Tuesday, with DHS Secretary John Kelly saying that Trump’s executive order was “not a ban on Muslims,” adding that “religious liberty is one of our most fundamental and treasured values.”
White House press secretary Sean Spicer also denied that the executive order constituted a ban on Muslims in the United States, also describing it yesterday as “a vetting system to keep America safe.”
But high-level advisers to the Trump administration, as well as Trump himself, have periodically characterized the policy as one intended to ban Muslim travelers from entering the United States. Trump initially rolled out his proposal in 2015 as a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”
Over time Trump’s public position on the issue shifted between “extreme vetting” and an “expansion” of the initial policy.
But former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a senior adviser to Trump, said in an interview on Fox News last week that Trump had asked him for advice on how to legally impose a Muslim ban. “I’ll tell you the whole history of it: When he first announced it, he said ‘Muslim ban,’” Giuliani told Fox News. “He called me up, he said, ‘Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally.’”
Trump’s chief of staff, Reince Priebus, said last Sunday that the executive order could soon expand to include more countries than the seven currently listed.
Rank and file employees at DHS, who for days have described an atmosphere of chaos and frustration at the agency, learned of the probe with some surprise, according to an official who spoke to The Intercept on condition of anonymity. “I think the OIG probe will demonstrate that there was a real sense of confusion over the weekend at DHS,” the official said. “I don’t think it will demonstrate any attempt to circumvent the circuit court rulings. There were, of course, numerous instances of individuals, including legal permanent residents being removed after the stay. But any orders to do this would have been given verbally either in person or over telephone. It is highly unlikely that any record of this would exist in written form.”
The inspector general’s investigation comes amid mounting tensions between the White House and career U.S. officials who oppose the Trump administration’s hard-line, anti-immigrant policies. On Monday, acting Attorney General Sally Yates was promptly removed from her position and accused of betraying the Department of Justice just hours after announcing that she would not defend Trump’s executive order on the grounds that it was illegal. Earlier in the day Spicer also lashed out at State Department officials working on a dissent channel memo registering their concerns over the administration’s order — the memo has since garnered 1,000 signatures.
Whether the increasing hostility will impact Roth’s investigation into Trump’s order remains to be seen. The senior immigration official expressed doubts, saying, “Standby for the sacking of the OIG.”
Top photo: A woman of Iranian descent, right, cries as she waits for a family member at Los Angeles International Airport following the immigration ban imposed by President Donald Trump, Jan. 30, 2017, in Calif.
I’m glad that people are protesting the ban against people from seven Muslim countries. People should also protest Algeria, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Yemen, Bangladesh, Brunei, Malaysia and Pakistan who ban people from Israel, the world’s only Jewish country.
“I’m glad that people are protesting the ban against people from seven Muslim countries. People should also protest … Israel, the world’s only Jewish country.”
No argument here.
People should be treated as individuals, not as members of a group.
How many freakin’ “departments” ARE there in our government??!!
Looks like a sloppy case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing.
Come on, Trump, DRAIN THE SWAMP like you promised!!
Your lying their is no investigations the government is following PRESIDENT TRUMPS
Executive Order.plain&Simple no local district judge can override an executive order from commander&Chief
Is this parody?
Various commentators — best described as national security disasters, but CNN, NPR, et al., keeps claiming they are “national security experts” — have been appearing on Fake News castigating President Trump for his insensitivity to ISIS!
Oh my!!!
To re-familiarize people with the S.O.P. (or Standard Operating Procedure) of the so-called national security establishment, let us take a close look at several incidents during the Obama Administration.
The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) had been apprised of two facts: (1) NSA-intercepted phone calls from al Qaeda in Yemen, indicating an unidentified Nigerian was in training for a terrorist attack; and, (2) the Nigerian father of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had contacted the US embassy in Nigeria warning them that his Nigerian son had become a “fervent radical” and was now in Yemen.
Who could possibly have connected those two pieces of data? Certainly not the special ed kids they hire as analysts at the NCTC?
So Umar tries to board a plane in France, inbound to Detroit, but French airport security refuses to allow him onboard.
Why? Because he has no passport — no luggage — a one-way ticket — smells bad and unwashed — keeps mumbling, “Jihad, jihad!”
A CIA dude arrives from the US embassy and overrides French airport security, vouching for the Underwear Bomber?!??!?!
Thanks to quick acting passengers, his underwear wasn’t allowed to fully detonate.
The FBI warned passengers to not tell the truth — to keep quiet (the same way they did after the 9/11 plane crash into the Pentagon; the same way they warned reporters on the Flight 800 specifics) but several patriotic passengers sounded off, and what they said about the events at the French airport were confirmed by French bystanders there.
Back in 2009, a Sunni US Army psychiatrist, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, killed 13 American soldiers awaiting out-processing, and wounded 32 others.
Prior to that mass murder rampage, Maj. Hasan had mailed more than a dozen e-mails to radical cleric, Anwar al-Awlaki, who was hiding in Yemen and on the terrorism watch list (President Obama would place him on the “kill on sight” list in 2010).
The NSA-intercepted e-mails were examined by FBI “counterterrorism analysts” (more special ed kids) who decided they required no further action — and never bothered to contact the Army with this information!?!?!?!
Who the bloody hell hires these people?????
That is our “national security establishment” and when Fake News like CNN, NPR (I’ve never listened to Fox, always considered them in that category to begin with) interview national security disasters — like former SecDef, Robert Gates (who was head of the Pentagon when it was open house for Chinese military hackers, who stole the plans to the Aegis naval system, the Joint Strike Fighter, military personnel records and who knows what else), former CIA disaster, Philip Mudd, former CIA director, John Brennan, who was head of the CIA station in Saudi Arabia when the Khobar Towers was bombed, killing 19 US servicemen, and whose office vetted those 15 Saudi Arabian hijackers who took part on the 9/11 attacks — they are perpetrating either propaganda, or more Fake News!
Just today Gen. David Petraeus weighed in, again accusing President Trump of insensitivity to Islamic terrorists — the very same former CIA director who was canned for passing along classified data to his girlfriend (his wife was reputed to have demanded of him: “You never gave me any classified data?”).
All the national security disasters are joining forces with Fake News on an assault on OUR national security!
Second attempt on comment:
The IG investigation needs to be broader – we need to understand how the Trump White House and Bannon machine work.
The scope of the IG investigation should be broader to include the origin and drafting of the Executive Order, not just its implementation.
We need to know how the Whitehouse and Bannon machine work.
Did this investigation begin under the Obama administration when he originally named these nations and imposed the travel ban?
From what I’m seeing now, and what I know working under Obama, all Trump did was cut the wait time from six months to four months.
you all go on and on about empire here, and still there is some small amount of surprise when empire plays out in one area or another … for all to see
but the protester must protest on, a hooked masturbatory claw of ego
This is what blowback from decades of foreign policy of subversion of sovereign nations looks like. Everyone not privy to the authorization and execution of that policy are victims, the dead and maimed most acutely, those deported mere collateral damage.
The politics of subversion reverberate and affect all of us by default. To pretend that Trump alone as instigator is as false as convenience of omission gets.
We have immigration laws to enforce and borders to protect. Ask the Swedes or Germans how un-vetted immigration has worked out for their social stability.
Better question for Trump is under what law do we entertain an invasion and occupation of Syria?
More of the same by the occulted cabal that we truly owe for the chaos.
We have immigration laws to enforce and borders to protect.
Interesting statement. Considering as far back as anyone remembers the United States has never respected borders ahead of it’s own agenda and has invaded countries at will.
True, but besides the point. You advocate lawlessness as solution?
Maybe you’ve forgotten the recent slaughter of over 60k civilians caught in drug trade wars of bad hombres.
No matter that the CIA fostered, funded and armed the slaughterers.
Yeah, like the border with Mexico. We stole half their country — “fair and square” — in a thinly-disguised war of opportunity and we’re gonna keep those “bad hombres” in the other half.
Unless you’re suggesting a complete dissolution of these United States, your self-righteous statement is utterly fatuous.
No doubt the remnant Zetas and the 60k or so dead could attest to the concept of bad hombres.
I love Mexico and its people, been there many times. There’s no guesswork among them about the viscousness they constantly defend themselves against, especially the campesinos.
Nor is it in question that the cabal running the US has exploited the worst of the Mexican criminals to do their bidding having armed the Sinaloa Cartel as their proxy.
Where were all these US libtard hypocrites when Obomba’s DoJ was running weapons south in Fast and Furious? Worrying about the dead at the hands of bad hombres?
It’s idiot partisans like you, Doug, than can’t see their own folly for the constant diet of distortion and lies that you thrive on. You think you’re superior to the Neocons, when in fact you’re one of their dupes. Laughable.
Dunning-Kruger.
Pathetic, Doug. Can’t rise to facts of the matter so you just wax full-bore pretentious.
Maybe I’m being unkind, but you’re such a constant jackass here. I thought at first it was cognitive dissonance at first, but now I see you as pure fool.
I’m afraid we’ll have to give you failing grades in both English and psychology this week.
My typo, your psycho, petty little man.
This inquiry by the Department of Homeland Security, although days overdue, might serve at least to highlight the glaring inequities of this immigration traval ban. Thousands of innocent persons who are simply trying to acheive a better life in the US have become hostages to a presidential campaign pledge that never should have seen the light of day. The US, a nation built on immigration, now forsakes the very principles it had always stood for: Liberty and Justice for all.
Its not a ban! Your fake news is tiresome and the people are tired of seeing your lies
WHAT is the legal status of an executive order?.? Prejudicial orders?.?
WE the PEOPLE, our country is a melting pot – –
E X C L U S I O N ?.? does not fit
The Congressional Election is in 2018 – PLEASE VOTE – OUR COUNTRY NEEDS YOU…….look at what is happening in Washington – AND by whom
In the 1960s, the protests were against the financial hegemons; today the mindless twits protest on behalf of the financial hegemons.
Bring in those foreign visa replacement workers form Iran and elsewhere, bring in those persecutors (for some reason they have been erroneously referred to as the “persecuted” or refugees) to lower wages and to further profit the war profiteers/refugee profiteers!
Seen and heard a lot of sob stories about foreign visa workers on CNN, NPR and ABC affiliates — never seen any sob stories (human interest news) about the carpet installers replaced by foreign visa workers, janitors replaced by foreign visa workers, technicians replaced by foreign visa workers, engineers replaced by foreign visa workers, programmers replaced by foreign visa workers, scientists replaced by foreign visa workers, etc., etc., etc.
Now why is that?
At least 170,000 production facilities have been shipped out of the country — any idea how many production and manufacturing jobs they entailed?
Yet these twits protest on behalf of those responsible — the globalists.
We are told repeatedly that subsidized foreign visa workers brought to the USA by American-based multinationals and India jobs-offshoring companies like Infosys and Tata are “immigrants” — oh yeah?
None of my ancestors, both legal and illegal immigrants, were ever subsidized by multinationals or anyone else.
Refugees — the legally correct definition, that is, not the Fake News definition — are those being persecuted — such as Christians from Syria, which Trump has addressed in his Executive Order, not Alawites, which are the persecutors. The Sunnis are also not the persecuted, but the persecutors.
Those protesters are seriously confused and uninformed!
Vulture speculators, war profiteers and refugee profiteers are all the same people — the same corporations!
Yet the protesters act as easily manipulated lemmings — once again playing follow the psycho-leader.
Until these pathetic little lemmings learn to think critically, to think independently, to think for themselves — there will never be solidarity in this country.
If you remain ignorant of who finances and controls the CorporateMedia, e.g., PBS and most of the programs on NPR, you remain clueless and easily conned.
Fake News has been with us forever, but many were once far more skeptical, whereas presently the dumbed down are far more suggestible to it.
Blithe world-is-flat neoliberalism is the killer and exploiter today.
I did not vote for Trump, and I admit to being surprised that he is really going to bat for the American worker, throwing a wrench into the globalization agenda.
So why aren’t you?
We’ve seen democratic appointees aid and abet in the poisoning of the water supply of Flint, Michigan; democratic politicians who created federal regulations forbidding oversight of the foreign visa worker federal rules and regulations, democratic politicians time and again supporting the offshoring of American jobs. Time to get your facts straight, people!
Trump will get us involved in another war or two, and another few trillions of debt, and another few trillions for the Wall Streeters. It does not take a PhD to see that – just clear-eyed thinking.
He will do all this damage not because he wants to, but because he does not have a clue – he thinks it is like being the boss on TV reality show. He is a narcissistic megalomaniacal man with average intelligence who has surrounded himself with ideologues who know how to manipulate him. He has built the swamp and filled it with slimy alligators.
If he has a clue, he will be able to do a lot more damage. I think the jury is still out, so it is important to remain open minded.
I also think that Mr. Trump will drain the swamp. He has a vision for a new swamp, a world class swamp, absolutely huge, and he will build it on the foundations of the old one, once it is drained, and the American taxpayer will pay for it.
It’s spelled “yuuuuuge”.
It’s true. By next year even Merriam Webster will have been forced to agree.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suggestions/yuge
There are two (2) kinds of open minded clues, benitoe. There is the essence of a clue, and then there is the qualities of a clue. The essence of a clue is known by the qualities of the clue … otherwise the clue is unknown and hidden.
I suspect President Trump is about to draw up a plan and give mexico an ultimatum. I am sure he has had it up to here (eyeballs) with the border crashers and is not about to bring jobs to America only to have them taken by the mexicans here. Mexico declared war on the US the day they lost texas and the day Poncho Villa lost his fight. Mexico resumed their attack except a little differently, invasion, occupation, domination. Real simple.
When President Trump issues an ultimatum to mexico for what they have cost US and for the wall and other things (what the drug war cost US) the mexicans in the US will panic and have to make a decision… kill other mexicans? run for the border? kill Americans? Recall those quarantine camps, well do the math. The mexican drug networks are so large and well armed – guess why – they are an instant army, just add water.
President Trump knows very well that the elected dumb&dumbers cant pour tea without breaking the pot.
Are you off your meds?
Is George Dubya volunteering his expertise on how to fix what he broke or is he prepared for the fallout of the illegal invasion? Sure – the price was a $5,000,000,000,000 in expenses and lost productivity and the US is still behind with a $10,000,000,000,000 bill coming up for infrastructure that could have been done for less than half that before the invasion.
Wallstreet has the US in a growth trap from a fraudulent currency scheme and wants to spread that disease over the planet – 7,000,000,000 people isnt sufficient for a system that has to double every 5 to 10 years. Double the prices (more poverty) or double the people (less resources) – they dont care. A nice war would help them and you can go figure why. But they still finance the terrorists one way or another, they relish wars, and dont give a damn who is killed. The pot is boiling over and the kitchen is getting a little hot.
President Trump wants to rebuild the foundation. It has to be done.
TPP NO. WALL YES. JOBS YES. Everything else can be fixed or refixed later.
“show me the right way to do it legally”
Saddam Hussein’s echoes?!
Yeah, that’s the money quote …
“Calling John Yoo. Mr. Yoo, please pick up the nearest white courtesy phone…”
Whatever Trump is doing, there are always the same people who fight him:
A report from OpenSecrets.org shows that the Republican politicians John McCain, Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio received funds from the globalist billionaire George Soros last year. John Kasich, Lindsey Graham and Carlos Curbelo are also on the Hedgefonds manager’s list. And little surprising these politicians are all Trump opponents.
John McCain, who used to support the offensive and globalist policies of Barack Obama (including Ukraine), has a financial link with the influential fund manager,
Because at that time McCain founded the “Reform Institute” in Alexandria (Virginia) as a vehicle to get money from George Soros’ Open Society Institute, Teresa Heinz Kerry’s Tides Foundation and other prominent NGOs. In this way, he financed his political agenda – and that of the donors.
It shows once again how far the influence of billionaires such as George Soros, who in the US two-party system easy bought both sides and so also got implemented his agenda.
The Soros influence is on its last legs as the founding father has not much longer to live….as an old record that will soon break.
“The Soros influence is on its last legs as the founding father has not much longer to live….as an old record that will soon break.”
One can only hope. But doesn’t he have descendants who will carry on his “legacy?”
Yes, like Obama has descendants who will carry on his legacy. Forget, forgot, forgotton.
If this order is illegal, then ALL immigration policy of ALL nations in ALL of history is illegal.
Excluding people from some countries and favoring people from other countries is EXACTLY what immigration control means. If you’re not excluding some people, you don’t have a border and you don’t have a nation.
#logicfail, in the same vein as “he’s the president, so of course he’s acting presidential”
Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Grenada, Chile, El Salvador the list goes on all had borders. Did it mean anything?
Last night on Dutch TV there was a protest against the so called US Muslim ban. The vice premier of the Netherlands was present standing next to demonstrators calling ‘Trump=fascist’. So why would Trump help this tiny European country if they have no respect for him personally nor for the US voter. Also the president of the European council in Brussels identified as a major risks for Europe… ISIS, Russia and the USA. Europeans are great at criticising others instead of looking at their own failings.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ban?s=t
To Ban means to bar, forbid or prohibit.
Muslims attempting to enter the United States with proper documents were prohibited from entering the US. This is the very definition of a ban.
Length of time makes no difference. Whether the ban was for one day, 90 days or 1 year. It’s still a ban. It’s a Muslim ban because Christians were allowed in while Muslims were not. Also this is discrimation based upon religion.
Some commenters seemed confused or not understanding what a ban is.
Because you want it so much,: Yes it is a temporary ban for people from 7 predominantly Muslim countries, identified by the Obama administration as high risk, with exceptions for diplomatic, military and green card holders.
Not sure what you mean by this statement. But I’m merely giving a definition of what a ‘ban’ is as there seems to be disagreement about the words usage. I actually have no disagreement with vetting person coming into the US. But what was done in this instance was a denial of persons who had lawful right to travel here.
So, No….that’s not what I want.
Of course it is a ban. But is it a Muslim ban? How would you argue it is a Muslim ban?
“It’s a Muslim ban because Christians were allowed in while Muslims were not.”
That view will not hold in US courts. First, thousands of Muslims were allowed in the country during the same period. Second, you will have to prove that officers detained individuals or turned them away because they were Muslims. Was there a religion test? Did any of those detained individuals complain about officers asking about their religious beliefs? How many of those detained individuals told the public that they were followers of Islam?
Candidates say a lot of BS, but courts usually give more weight to what the actual elected official does, not to what he said he would do as a candidate. I am afraid the law is heavily on the executive side on that one.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/760033/Trump-s-Muslim-ban-BEGINS-Travellers-report-being-turned-away-from-US-borders
Yes, Muslims are being turned away. As to your other obviously silly and unanswerable questions, time will tell. I’m sure we will hear that there was a religious test and individuals making complaints as you described.
In this case, there is ample evidence to prove exactly that this was a Muslim ban by Trump’s statements and Guilani’s statements. So, there have it.
This is exactly why several judges have already found this order to be unlawful.
If you’re not seeing this aspect of it, then you are just being willfully blind to it and there is no sense in debating it as you are not open to actual, factual evidence in the way of statements, documentation and documented actions.
“This is exactly why several judges have already found this order to be unlawful.”
Not a single judge considered the plaintiffs’ religion when they halted Trump’s order. The judges halted the order because the plaintiffs already have visas or other documents that allow them access to the United States.
You can read some of the orders here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/28/us/refugees-detained-at-us-airports-prompting-legal-challenges-to-trumps-immigration-order.html?_r=0
And here:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-federal-order-travel-ban-20170201-story.html
Can you share link in which PRESIDENT Trump stated it was a Muslim ban? You can call it Muslim ban if you wish, but there is no way the courts will go for it when thousands of Muslims are enterering the US as we speak and you cannot prove that border officials were testing visitors’ religion. US laws give the president the right to decide who enters the United States on the basis of national security. Moreover, US courts already concluded that Iran targeted and killed US citizens. Yes, it is a political ban against Muslim, but courts do go by what I think. They go by the law and by evidence. Trump is more likely to win that one in the courts.
Milo had to be evacuated from the UC Berkely campus tonite due to violent riots and his planned speech was cancelled. All hell has broken loose, injuries, banks windows smashed, lots of cops in heavy gear.
This riot isn’t really about Milo I don’t think. It’s about saying “fuck no!” to what Milo represents.
“It’ll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls, for the times they are a changin'” … “The order is rapidly fading”
Josh Turner (on your right) and Friend
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfFZ9FyB6rs
Yes, I’m afraid so. There are now fires. Apparently the media is more all over this than when a Milo fan shot a protester in WA state. It’s definitely going to get very ugly.
It makes me kind of sick, but I think we are entering a civil war. Unlike the last one, tho, geographical boundaries are not there.
Have you considered booting up a jolly golly good great blog of yer own, my lovely handsome laddy?
Been there, done that. I’m happier without the pressure to post new content on a regular basis. Glenn Greenwald’s comment space has been my primary online community for eleven years, even when I blogged. My community is here, so, that’s it.
He was shut down before he got started at UC Davis, also, a couple of weeks ago. No real violence, but the local College Republicans and the UniCops decided that discretion was the better part of valor and canceled about half an hour before the scheduled start.
Berkeley’s protest was a little less restrained. The crowd, intentionally or otherwise, knocked over a generator-powered lighting rig the police had set up and the fuel caught fire. Pretty impressive video. Cops fired rubber bullets. Lots of excitement.
Milo is a provocateur. He’s been offering scholarships to “white males only.” He loves reactions like this, as do the Trump Gangsters generally. This stuff is raw meat for their torch and pitchfork brigades.
If you check the comments on the SFGate coverage, you’ll find hundreds of foaming right-wingers howling for “leftist” blood, demanding that the police be allowed to respond with deadly force.
Lots of energy out there. Not well-focused at the moment, but lots of it.
That’s the thing. Milo is a provocateur. And this is giving him what he wants. I’m undecided whether that makes it a disastrous tactic, or merely unsettling.
“It’s about saying “fuck no!” to what Milo represents.”
I think we’re way beyond that. It’s an amalgamation of many of the same sentiments that gave many Trump voters something to vote for (economic insecurities, mostly) combined with outrage that we’ve allowed these self-serving fascists into power, despite having the numbers to keep them out.
Although over 50% of voters didn’t vote to change the status quo, many may have thought someone else would (or were content enough to be resigned to it).
It’s not a monolithic phenomena; there’s still an awful lot of pent up anxiety and discontent, and Trump’s outright belligerence and pivot to the dark side is escalating progressives on the left and those who didn’t vote at all into expressing themselves, with some parts of almost all factions expressing themselves violently.
He loves reactions like this, as do the Trump Gangsters generally. This stuff is raw meat for their torch and pitchfork brigades.
Yes. And it allows them to turn it on the left, to point and yesll to their followers, “See! See what they do! See what’s truly in their hearts!”
It allows them to project what they want to do on others. It justifies them. That’s why I think it’s disastrous. It will, eventually, result in the police being completely unleashed on protesters, which is the direction they’re already heading with the new anti-protest laws being created in states across the nation.
“It will, eventually, result in the police being completely unleashed on protesters…”
That’s why I wonder whether the so-called “Black Bloc” aren’t actually government provocateurs.
“Claude Arnold, who served as the former Special Agent in Charge for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Homeland Security Investigations in Southern California, Nevada, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota, said he has witnessed voter fraud firsthand.
““Throughout my 27-year career with [Immigration and Naturalization Service] and ICE, I arrested hundreds of illegal criminal aliens who had voter registration cards,” Arnold said. “They would often admit they voted, but they were rarely prosecuted for illegally voting.””
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/01/experts-california-voter-registration-system-highly-susceptible-to-fraud.html
Printing a fake card, which can easily be done on a home printer does not mean that person is on the voter rolls. One is not allowed to vote because one has a card, one is allowed to vote if they have “registered” to vote. The registering process provides the controls on who is elgible to vote.
Furthermore, admitting to voting is not “voter fraud,” as having a fake voter registration card is not “voter fraud,” actually voting, when not qualified, is the crime. Mr. Arnold has no proof of this, as well as, an illegal alien getting social security payments because he or she had a fake social security card.
The Social Security Administration requires a new updated card before benefits are approved. This involves two identity proofs, even though the cards appears legal. At my age 65 I needed to reapply though I had carried my cards and been accepted by employers since age 16. Those fake cards might work for shady employers, but not the SSA.
Remarkable how the continued uttering of unsubstantiated lies gains a foothold in some minds.
It wouldn’t suck to upgrade your critical thought processes, and perform some research on your own.
Barret Brown interview — dated today (Feb 1st)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrqJVr6ddfA
What an intellect. I caught it earlier. Revealing what an entirely unaccountable corporate intelligence community were doing to many ordinary politically active Americans back in 2010 2011 required TPTB shut down Barrett Brown ASAP.
His mind is sharp and his nerves are steady.
Update on the killing of 8-yr-old Nawar al-Awlaki by American troops in Yemen:
I guess they’re Trump’s wars now. Of course, the Trumpaloompas will keep blaming Obama, just as the Obamabots blamed Bush for the Drone Ranger’s killings and warmongering.
Trumpites are like the Squealer from Animal Farm, they keep “skipping from side to side”, accept delicious lies and eat it up, hoping that it will fill their empty hearts and minds.
We can be polite and call them misguided, uninformed, desperate, fearful, etc. A lot of Nazi collaborators claimed the same – that their actions were the result of ignorance, fear, and desperation – how did that work out?
I wish those commenting on articles would stop making every argument left/right, liberal/conservative, democrat/republican. It is just a distraction that prevents any real discussion about the actual issues in the articles. That stuff is just a way to keep citizens busy blaming each other, or even worse blaming an obscure opposite “evil ideology,” so noone will hold their elected officials responsible for their actions.
Concerns about the manner in which this executive order was issued and how the lack of planning and input has resulted in questions of legality, abuse, and inconsistent enforcement, as well as how its extreme nature will fuel terrorist propaganda, have been expressed by members of Congress in both parties. And, as shown in other Intercept articles, this executive order is based on actions taken in the past by both the Bush and Obama administration. Trump just took it to the extreme along with his “big ideas but no plan” method.
Trump’s actions would not be possible without congressional representatives from both parties who have allowed the presidential power to grow and ignored policies and actions that have undermined our democracy for the last 16 years. So instead of blaming some commenter or ideology, start blaming those members of Congress we have elected to represent us in both parties who allowed us to get to this place.
President Trump is doing the correct thing here!
When Muslims are the minority they are obsessed with minority rights. Where Muslims are the majority, there are no minority rights. Think about that when they gain political power in the USA…it’s just a matter of time.
Secularism is essentially unknown in Muslim culture. Did you know that? I doubt it because liberal Democrats are too wound up in hating those who they disagree with.
Liberal Democrats are certainly wound up in hating those they disagree wiht, including hating many of the writers at this site. The rest of your comment is bigoted bullshit.
I state facts and get called a bigot by a liberal Democrat. Nothing new here.
Life Hack: Stop acting like a bigot and saying bigoted things; people will stop calling you bigot. “Liberal Democrats” don’t want you to know this.
LOL Oh, honey, I am soooo not a “liberal Democrat.” But thanks for the giggle.
The problem is, you didn’t state facts. I’m not a liberal either, but bigotry is obvious, even to moderates and republicans. Trump is endangering our guys in Iraq with this stupidity. If he had done this right, and asked the professionals he’s appointed, all of this chaos and b.s. all over the entire world could have been avoided, but he could give a crap about keeping anyone safe. If that were his goal, THINKING about it for five seconds would have told him he was making a big mistake.
And you expected something different? Had a particulary viscious encounter with Dougie Poo the other day. For him and Mona, commenting here is like taking a shot of heroin into their veins…they really need it. Notice how the “Bigot” card was played. That’s textbook. Actually, I would not go as far as to call Mona a liberal democrat. I consider myself a classic liberal democrat….this new Social Justice Warrior/Identity politics is an aberation of classical liberalism and is nothing more than an attempt to shut anyone down who disagrees with them. Its really an obscene form of narcissism if anything else.
I truly expected something different. But I encourage you and others to report commenters like Mona to the moderator or to the writers directly. She is abusing her friendship with the writers to disrupt any debates she cannot handle. Sooner or later, if those writers care about their sections they would have to conclude that their sections should not be hijacked. Out of nowhere she called me a Zionist who is preventing her from spreading the truth and she goes around different sections falsely claiming that I am a Zionist who stated she is mentally ill. We did not even argue about Israel policies! And I did not really disagree with her. I just underlined the illogical characteristic of her reasonings. Indeed, this is textbook: quickly spread falsehoods about others to damage their reputation.
“She is abusing her friendship with the writers to disrupt any debates she cannot handle. Sooner or later, if those writers care about their sections they would have to conclude that their sections should not be hijacked.”
I agree, and suggested the very same thing on another thread.
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/31/the-fbi-has-quietly-investigated-white-supremacist-infiltration-of-law-enforcement/
Which do you think is the greater problem. Refugees or this?
“whether CBP officers complied with subsequent court orders,”
Executive office personnel DO NOT COMPLY with court orders unless directed by their superiors.
” All the other male pigs on the farm were porkers. The best known among them was a small fat pig named Squealer, with very round cheeks, twinkling eyes, nimble movements, and a shrill voice. He was a brilliant talker, and when he was arguing some difficult point he had a way of skipping from side to side and whisking his tail which was somehow very persuasive. The others said of Squealer that he could turn black into white. ”
The “skipping from side to side” is common to all Trumpites. They accept unpleasant reality that Trump has turned it into delicious lies and eat it up. They only have themselves to blame when they starve while the pigs get fatter.
Trump extracts the U.S. from TTP. That’s no good enough for The Interc-….
Oh wait, The Intercept endorses the globalist Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.
gotta call out the horsecrap where it lies
– link please where the intercept endorsed the TPP
“Will it be a Donald Trump who is eager to strong-arm China at the negotiating table, or the Donald Trump who promised to discard the Trans-Pacific trade deal designed to increase American leverage over the region?” –Mattathias Schwartz, The Intercept, December 27, 2016
The Intercept has not endorsed the TPP (and an unlinked quote of Mattathias Schwartz doesn’t support otherwise, and wouldn’t even of Schwartz himself actually had made such an endorsement). Communete is a freak who thinks Hitler was a leftist, that North Korea is really a democratic republic and that an extremely fine book is this feverish lunacy.. Nothing he claims can be taken as credible.
Lame, Mona. “An unlinked quote,” “…even of [sic] Schwartz himself actually had.” You can visit the article if you like; I provided the verbatim quote and published date.
How many posts is it going to be tonight? Currently 9 on 64. 14% of the section you’ve thread-jacked so far? You’re just coasting this time.
I repeat: The Intercept has not endorsed TPP. That’s as unhinged a claim as most of your others.
https://theintercept.com/2016/12/27/trumps-homeland-security-pick-falsely-claimed-narcoterrorism-has-killed-500000-americans/
Did so, and you’re quite mistaken.
Yeah we get it. Trump is the bad man. Zzzz.
Were’d all your readers go?
They’re still here. But Trump’s certainly got media attention, huh?
You mean like this, from the days immediately following the June 2015 campaign announcement?
https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+new+york+daily+news&client=tablet-android-att-us&prmd=niv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi4rbjWnfDRAhUGLyYKHeIEBJcQ_AUICCgC&biw=600&bih=1024
Some rattled globalists….
LOL, no.
Guiliani’s comments that Trump verbally ordered a “ban on muslims” requires that audio tapes from the White House also be subpoenaed. Along with other requested material, this may provide the best evidence of verbal directives that may violate the constitution.
My concerns include the arbitrary nature of a ban, with no known threats or prior evidence of terrorists to the US from these countries. (unlike Russia and Saudi Arabia). My concern is also that majority-Muslim countries allowed in are countries where Trump has business dealings. Thus corruption may be involved due to his personal and family business interests. My third concern is that Due Process is not served when green-card holders and immigrants already vetted have those rights revoked for no material reason.
Semantics. Muslim ban from countries that are designated as ISIS hotspots in the ME. A temporary ban to make sure those migrants are not harboring ISIS operatives/murderers. Let’s see. We have Islamic terrorists who vowed to kill every American they can, and if they can enter the US they will carry out their goals.
But Democrats are more worried about the migrants. How did the migrants become migrants? Because Bush and Obama, along with liar Hillary Clinton, decided to bomb them; those drone attacks have killed hundreds of innocent men, women, children, babies.
Did we hear the Loud Left when those bombs fell? Did we hear obscenities and seditious rhetoric directed at Obama? Did we hear the Loud Lamenters for those poor, pathetic souls when Obama/Hillary did their dirty deeds?
Crickets!
All this noisy negativism is nothing but Pure Politics as usual. And the left has outed itself for all to see.
Hypocrites.
You clearly do not know where you are. Two of the three co-founders of this site have written vast amount of criticism of Obama and Hillary Clinton’s murderous policies. One of them literally wrote the book on it.
Moreover, this “temporary” ban will not be temporary, until the courts make it so and Dear Leader decides to obey court orders. Such draconian measures never are.
I do know. I am trying to comprehend the Democrats who have lurch to the far left. I used to be one, so this new revolution that they are perpatring on the American people is nauseating because of its inherent hypocrisy.
I laud Greenwald. I read his book on Snowden in a book club I ran; it was excellent and I think he is a courgeous investigative journalist. I don’t always agree but then again, I think we do better as a nation if we stop and listen once in awhile to the opposing voices.
I am recently new so maybe I haven’t yet read them all.
I believe journalism is our last best hope for a sane and civil society, a compassionate nation, but one in which we also cherish our own. What I’m hearing and reading from the left smacks of sedition and in some cases, calls for harm to the POTUS. They may not like him, they can hate him, but when the rhetoric goes over the top, I say, STOP. Full.Stop.
We are Americans. We can figure out a way to help refugees, without putting our own citizens in harm’s way. I haven’t fogotten 9/11. The left shouldn’t either.
Sheesh. You people are such sniveling cowards. From 1975 through the end of 2015, the chance of an American being murdered in a terrorist attack caused by a refugee was 1 in 3.64 billion annually.
We can’t let ignorant, innumerate cowards decide policy in this country, but if we cut back on the ridiculous “defense” budget, we might be able to build safe spaces for you.
There is no “far left” in the United States, not to speak of. Certainly not among Democrats. Indeed, their vomitrocious, neoliberal, technocratic, not-left bullshit is why we have POTUS Trump. It is why the Democratic Party is a “smoking pile of rubble” (Matt Yglesias’ accurate description) at the federal, state and municipal levels.
Did you forget the illegal war we were plunged into by W over 9/11? The million dead non enemy combatant Iraqis as a result? Did you forget about oil for dollars and that our illegal war allowed us to leave behind the weapons Saudi Arabia needed from us to fulfill our end if the bargain we made? Did you forget that Trumps ban does not include Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, Lebannon or Saudi Arabia were the people who did carry out actual attacks on US soil were originated from? Of course you did.
“I am trying to comprehend the Democrats who have lurch to the far left. I used to be one, so this new revolution that they are perpatring on the American people is nauseating because of its inherent hypocrisy.
As a former Democrat myself, it seems what we’re seeing is many of the neoliberal Democrats and their supporters (who thought the election was in the bag) reacting to their humiliating loss of power – hence the hypocrisy.
I agree with Mona, “far left” isn’t really a thing, it’s a label applied incorrectly, largely by the alt-right aligned folks, to further their “divide and conquer” agenda.
Democrats are Right Wing, as they are a Capitalist party. The Left has been vocal against the wars of aggression the whole time (but the right wing media – i.e. all Capitalist media) does not report on it.
The division of right/left is Capitalism vs Socialism. If Sanders was a Democratic Socialist as he claime (rather than the New Deal Liberal he actually is), this would be a Centrist position.
Every liberal I know was against the drone program. Hillary did not get the support she needed precisely because she was not liberal enough. Sorry friend, but liberals are not the ones blindly following the boorish and childish “leadership” of a proven liar and racist. There is nothing in any of Trumps exec orders that would have prevented any US terrorist attack of the past 20 years. You need to look in the mirror and ask yourself why conservatives need to continuously lie and distort facts in order to defend their positions. If you need to wrap yourself in a bubble of “alternative facts” and accuse news media outlets, universities, international organizations, and basically the rest of the world of conspiring against you, then you need to rethink your worldview.
Obviously, your first time here. But yes, people at this site especially the authors have been screaming at the top of their lungs…..for years. Especially Glenn Greenwald.
You merely need to do a search on him and the Iraq war to get a flavor to it. But you criticism is exactly correct….Dems were silent as Greenwald pointed out each and every time it occurred.
Check out Greenwald’s writings at both Salon.com and The Guardian. He’s covered the Obama presidency and Bush presidency quite well.
correct
chuckie schumer supports murder of palestinians for land or close enough thereby and therewith
Yes, he does, and he also approved the thugs that T. nominated. I’ll remember all of this next election cycle, hope other New Yorkers do as well.
@ Alex and Malinois
Both Donald Trump and Sean Spicer have called it a Muslim ban. Indeed, CNN’s Jake Tapper very entertainingly pwned Spicer with that fact.
During this morning’s PC, Spicer alluding to all the positive poll stats, repeatedly described them as, “in favor of the”ban””.
Not one member of the press pool called him on it
I think RJ Steele, below, put it about as clearly and succinctly as possible:
“It’s a Muslim ban because everyone being banned is a Muslim.”
Calling something a Muslim ban doesn’t necessarily make it so. To be sure, this is a Muslim ban, but it is because it effectively bans Muslims from 7 countries while it simultaneously allows Christians through.
The fact that it doesn’t apply to other countries is irrelevant. The primary cause for the ban is the religion and only 7 countries are yet identified and affected.
Substance over Form. It’s a great concept that can easily be applied to many things.
I would even go one step further in calling it a Religious Ban. For now, it’s related to Muslims. But if the courts allow this sort of thing, then the US government at some point in the future will say it’s a valid basis for disallowing any religion it doesn’t agree with.
Again, yes….it’s a ban. But it’s a ban because of the reasons I stated, not because someone said so….the reverse is true as well.
Again, using labels is just a ‘form’, not necessarily revealing the underlying substance which is what your argument should be. You’re really begging the idiots around here to pick apart that sort of argument with statements to you like…”well, Trump lies about everything or is an idiot and doesn’t know what he’s saying. So, why are you relying on his statements for your argument?” ;)
Yes Mona, we get it… the worst possible spin is going to be dishonestly applied to Trump’s actions regardless of the reality surrounding them:
Donald Trump and Sean Spicer both called it a Muslim ban. End of.
Well, some of us do, but not you.
Except for the fact it is a lie to state that Pres. Obama ever “banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/01/29/trumps-facile-claim-that-his-refugee-policy-is-similar-to-obama-in-2011/?utm_term=.2e0cf2b94005
But in Trump’s mind, and yours apparently, lies are truth.
Either that, or the phrase “Muslim ban” is inappropriately applied in the description of both situations – which is exactly that which is exactly the point that Trump was attempting to make. Both presidents took actions that had the net affect of limiting immigration from problem areas. But hey, what is the benefit of the truth compared to the choices offered by a false dilemma, eh Mr Heard?
For clarity sake:
Either that, or the phrase “Muslim ban” is inappropriately applied in the description of both situations – which is exactly the point that Trump was attempting to make. Both presidents took actions that had the net affect of limiting immigration from problem areas. But hey, what is the benefit of the truth compared to the choices offered by a false dilemma, eh Mr Heard?
No Trump is stating a factual lie. His policy, and it is widely known is actively detaining or turning away people in airports with existing visas, and actively denying new visas. Thus a “ban” as the word is commonly understood.
One policy has the net effect of denying existing visas and not adding any new visas in the first instance (Trump’s ban), the other had the net effect of slowing down applications for new visas (not stopping immigration) and in the case of the 58K + existing visas, settled refugees, or immigrants from Iraq of whatever status a re-review of all of their information against various databases. Nobody with an existing visa was turned away or detained, and new visa applications were not categorically denied, they simply had to wait a bit long to be processed and granted under the new standards if appropriate.
The problem is people like you apparently are incapable of reading for comprehension unless little pictures in crayon are drawn apparently, or everything must be spun with your particular partisan can’t. Or you’re too lazy to follow a link. A real dilemma for me which is motivating you.
In either event the difference between Trump and Obama’s policies isn’t a “false dilemma”, eh, Mr. Karl, because the two acts were different in intent and impacted existing and future visas quite differently–by intent.
So continue to spin the lie however you’d like, but it isn’t a false dilemma either.
And if you think the Orange Emperor isn’t going to turn America into a pariah state within a year with behavior like this, you’re fooling yourself:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/no-gday-mate-on-call-with-australian-pm-trump-badgers-and-brags/2017/02/01/88a3bfb0-e8bf-11e6-80c2-30e57e57e05d_story.html?postshare=501485995710926&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.3f6a4e43e527
Going around threatening and badgering two heads of state, one of your strongest allies, and one of your two biggest trading partners (Canada and Mexico) in the case of Mexico, I think we’re all in for a rude awakening.
The guy is a one man walking talking fake haired buffoonish orangutan (no insult intended to orangutans which are quite peaceful and likely smarter that the Orange Emperor).
And if the Orange Emperor thinks sparking up a hot war with Iran is smart, or will go over well with China and Russia, then I’m pretty sure not only is he mentally ill but so is every one of his military advisors.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/01/iran-trump-michael-flynn-on-notice
Such a war would end in exactly one place–nuclear war. And then all the righty fundies won’t have to worry about global warming or the Rapture, because the first will be irrelevant and the latter will be upon us all.
Serve America right I suppose in sense, but pity the rest of the globe for the stupidity of the world’s most exceptional people ever.
I’ve always said, America is likely to set the record for the world’s fastest rise to empire, and the shortest reign as one. That’s how dumb and violent some people are in this nation.
it is you who suffers from a profound lack of reading comprehension. I argued that the phrase “Muslim ban” is inappropriately applied in the description of both situations. But what is a little thing like accuracy when you are attempting to set the stage for an ad hominem attack via the use of a straw man argument, eh Mr. Heard?
For the sake of truth however, let’s explore the language with which you advance your current claims. The word “ban” has many meanings – each of which can only be understood in context. The word ban in this instance applies to the actions of both presidents that intentionally resulted in a temporary suspension (AKA moratorium) of standard operating procedure in the issuance of visas to foreign nationals for the sake of a facilitating a review process of vetting protocols. It is only with this proper understanding of the word “ban” that we can properly weigh the merits of your remaining claims:
1. Trump’s policy has the net effect of denying existing visas
More accurately: Trump’s 90 day suspension of existing immigration policy was expressly constructed to delay entrance into the United States by citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen on existing visas. This suspension of SOP was initially meant to include green cards holders, who are legal permanent US residents, but green card holders have since been exempted.
2. Trump’s policy has the net effect of denying the issuance of new visas
More accurately: Trump’s 90 day suspension of existing immigration policy was expressly constructed to delay the issuance of new entry visas into the United States by citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
3. Obama’s actions had the net effect of only slowing down applications for new visas. New visa applications were not “categorically” denied.
More accurately: Obama’s suspension of existing immigration policy had the net effect of reducing the issuance of new US visas to Iraqi refugee applicants by two thirds; The reduction in the issuance of Visas went from 18,251 in 2010 to just 6,339 in 2011.
4. Obama’s actions did not cause any Iraqi with an existing visa to be turned away or detained
Maybe not, but many were re-vetted do to a lack of available access to bio-metric data contained in proprietary databases at the time the applications were processed. Obama’s review of vetting protocols also severely undermined the issuance of Special Immigrant Visas to tens of thousands of deserving Iraqi applicants:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/george-packer/iraqi-refugees-a-debt-defaulted
Even Trump’s suspension of immigration from Syria will be subject to review within 120 days. By comparison, there were many reports of Iraqi applicants whose visa application were delayed for more than a year during between 2011-2013.
That’s largely because the US already has one of the most stringent vetting processes in the world. A 6 month increase in processing time + the normal time to process a visa could easily extend the overall time to more than a year.
But I digress. You have still failed to bring up any relevant rebuttals and frankly letting you dictate the direction of a conversation you are unwilling to engage in factually is tiring. We all need a new way of “talking” with you people: either engage in discourse meaningfully, or be promptly rebuked and ignored.
I don’t remember you ever being a part of this conversation – unless, of course, you are just another one of Mona’s sock puppets…
If you read the New Yorker article to which I linked then you would recognize that what you are saying is simply not true. Special Immigrant Visas were “specifically created by Congress to expedite the cases” of those who worked on behalf of the American government. Beyond the delays caused by Obama’s review process itself, the “introduction of new background checks” were cited by the NY Times as the cause for extended delays of more than a year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/world/middleeast/13baghdad.html
The same article also recorded the fact that the Obama “administration is ignoring a directive from Congress to draft a contingency plan to expedite visas should those Iraqis who worked for the United States government, especially interpreters for the military, come under increased threat after American forces are drawn down at the end of the year.” This was a full year after two Iraqis had been arrested in the US for plotting to carry out a terrorist act which prompted Obama’s review. Advocates for Iraqi immigration attributed the delays to a lack of concern by the Obama administration:
Again, Obama’s suspension of existing immigration policy had the net effect of reducing the issuance of new US visas to Iraqi refugee applicants by two thirds; The reduction in the issuance of Visas went from 18,251 in 2010 to just 6,339 in 2011. This includes the five thousand Special Immigrant Visas that had already been at the start of fiscal year 2011 which began in Oct 2010. The delays resulting from Obama’s review were so protracted that the New York times and New Yorker Magazine wrote about the problem at the time.
Lastly, I will leave it up to the remainder of readers as to whether a NON-BIASED comparison of Trump’s review to that of Obama has value.
And I demonstrated exactly why you are wrong and can’t read for comprehension or employ words vs. actions and intentions coherently.
Oh so now it’s a “suspension,” not a ban, but still like Pres. Obama’s non-ban, non-suspension?
You’re such a pathetic liar and moron.
And how’s about don’t play your silly little “net effect” semantic bullshit with someone paid to read, write and analyze the law and facts.
And as far as this goes,
Still 100% consistent with a slowdown due to a change in standards, rather than outright temporary (or permanent) “ban” of Trump to impose new standards, not requested by Congress, but by his executive fiat.
The relevant number would be how many total new visas were granted vs. applied for under Obama’s new standard, asked for by Congress, not how long it took Obama’s state department and immigration to vet them under the new standard.
I’m done with you, because you don’t want to understand or be persuaded by facts or an accurate usage and meaning of words. You want to defend Trump’s ban, whether temporary or permanent, against the citizens of 7 predominately Muslim countries for some reason you clearly haven’t articulated.
And it sure as shit isn’t “security” as Pres. Obama’s policy with regard to those countries hasn’t allowed in a single documented terrorist. Not one.
I knew that in, even responding to your initial insults with reasoned arguments, I ran the risk of you engaging in your usual practice of claiming victory even in defeat. This is a trait that you and Mona have in common. Again, you never addressed the phrase “Muslim Ban” in responding to my original post. Instead you chose to shift the focus of the discussion to the word “ban” alone. And even then you engaged in advancing the self-serving specious claim that word “ban” should be interpreted in a way that reflects “common usage” – which is utter bullshit! Context should always determine the intended meaning of a given word! Anyone reading your response will see it as pure obfuscating sophistry.
I have read posts by Mona, rrheard and you on a regular basis for some time and it is quite clear why the two of them are threatened by you. As attorneys, they both subscribe to a win-at-all-cost philosophy while neither has a moral compass that points true north. They like to present themselves as champions of the underdog while wearing a certain set of enlightened ideals on their sleeve for all to see. Yet they actually see themselves as wolves among sheep and delight in devouring the weak while simultaneously condemning the dog-eat-dog nature of people like Trump. In short, they are both “narcissistic sociopaths” as you have astutely observed on occasion. They have both provided ample evidence that they have total disregard for the feelings and thoughts of others who choose not to worship them and mirror their world view. Most humorous of all they have displayed a pervasive pattern of grandiosity that is so over the top that their very words and actions could be easily misinterpreted as a form of self parody. Ironically, narcissistic sociopaths are possessed of a parasitic mindset that compels them to form attachments to those whose empathy makes them an ideal host.
You, on the other hand, seem to be tragically possessed of a quixotic nature that is compelled to address the worst in human nature – especially in defense of the intellectually weak and/or the emotionally vulnerable – with little hope of success. Which is rather ironic, because you are constantly ranting about groups like Black Lives Matters and the type of identity politics they embrace that purportedly seeks to emphasize the rights of the culturally marginalized over those of the culturally privileged majority. Also ironic is the fact that you always seem compelled to lock horns with those who endeavor to be perceived as being inclusive while viciously attacking those whose ideas do not strictly conform to their own. As someone who is deeply intolerant of hypocrisy, I marvel at the abuse that you have been willing to take in exposing those who live for the opportunity to abuse others in the name of truth, inclusiveness, and multiculturalism. But I am also deeply puzzled… why bother? The world neither begins nor ends with the incessantly obsequious and self aggrandizing drivel espoused by Mona or rrheard. Given that you possess a workable degree of insight into the darker aspects of human nature, I wonder why you do not simply avoid such types for the sake of your own sanity.
My opposition to many of the posts by Mona and rrheard have as much to do with form as substance and are written for the benefit of those who lack the skill or will to do so themselves. However, I do not believe that, by dint of word alone, I have the power to convince either of them that their chronic disregard for the truth has dire karmic consequence. First of all, a house of lies is a self made prison that requires constant upkeep in the way of more lies just to sustain itself; those who dwell within are just as committed to deceiving themselves as others. Unlike the average Joe who is only interested in exchanging ideas for the sake of better understanding the world around them, Mona and rrheard are existentially invested in being perceived as something other than that which they they are – authentic. Thus, when their lies are openly challenged, they feel a two-fold effect that is always received as a personal attack. This is also why chronic liars feel compelled to rush to the aide of persons like themselves. Just a few months ago rrheard publicly declared that he agreed with more than 95% of my posts but, when his views were more recently challenged by me, he claimed that nothing I say warrants merit (paraphrase); this swing in opinion reveals the degree to how such types are invested in their own lies. What is often misinterpreted as ideological dogmatism in such types is, in fact, born of existential necessity. It is absolutely essential for them to be perceived as being all knowing and, by extension, all powerful else their whole house of cards is at risk of collapsing. Thus any challenge of their opinions warrants an all out attack on the credibility of the challenger. This is why Mona and rrheard are so committed to the use of ad hominem in any response to a perceived detractor. Apropos of the foregoing, it does not require a tremendous amount of insight to understand why this type of individual endeavors to dwell in the shadow of those whose opinions are perceived to be held in high regard. By dogmatically reflecting the opinion of Glenn Grenwald, they can use him as a type of foil wherein attacks on their own stated opinions can be readily characterized as an attack on Greenwald himself.
In regard to my “rants” about groups like BLM, one has to look a bit deeper into the use of such groups as change agents by the likes of Soros. There are many who sing the praises of democracy while working to undermine the will of the majority. Such efforts are facilitated by a gross mischaracterization of traditional cultural values and are aided by intentional anachronistic distortions of how those values have evolved to culminate in seemingly detestable outcomes.
Thanks for the feedback – it is appreciated
I would have hyphenated ‘self-aggrandizing’.
Yes, good call. Thx
:)
a/1) you should mention that the senators mentioned in the article are democratic. Imho it adds some welcome context.
2/b) the comment system and threading seems to be a little better than it was at first but there still seems to be plenty of room for improvement in clarity of discussion, as shown visually and other areas prolly too.
peace
yellow journalism.
jaundiced comment.
“jaundiced comment.”
plenny uv bial tho don u no.
how u doin hunnee?
This was all done so unfairly, ineptly that Trump and company’s claims of merely trying to keep Americans safe come off as a hoax and political grandstanding, and also that harassment and intimidation have, seemingly by design and intent, been at the core of Trump’s objectives.
At the very rock-bottom least, they’ve been unconscionably negligent and incompetent, morphing their fear of others into an administrative cluster-fuck the likes of which we haven’t seen.
This is all suggested by the belligerence and self-justification of not only the executives, but also the ground troops deciding who gets in and who doesn’t, bringing to mind the image of Mengele at Auschwitz, waving his finger this way or that, deciding for himself who lives and who dies.
Except this time, they’re not deciding who lives and dies immediately, they’re merely deciding who gets torn away from their family and who doesn’t; who gets to go home and who doesn’t; who gets stranded in a strange country and who doesn’t; who deserves to pursue the American Dream and who doesn’t.
These policies are taking us back to the future at a furious pace. We need to stay grounded now more than ever.
Trump’s response to any legal challenge on this to those underneath him:
Presidential Pardon.
Next….
I was thinking he’d do more along the lines of “John Marshall made his decision, let him enforce it!”
lol…I made a similar comment like that just yesterday.
Yes, quite likely. And the next chapter just might be Trail of Tears 2.0.
There will be way more people on the new Trail.
This is nothing more than hysterical conjecture.
The border agents who disobeyed court orders need to be fired and prosecuted and sued.
Here is an interesting explanation showing us why Saudi Arabia was not included in the nations banned by the Trump Administration:
http://viableopposition.blogspot.ca/2017/01/saudi-arabia-and-trump-administration.html
Not surprisingly, thanks to lobbying and connections to insiders, in Washington it’s often profits before geopolitics.
Who ever wants to take responsibility when the first terrorist act is committed by one of these immigrants we cannot check because of you feel gooders, please tell me who do we call and complain to: The Democrats? Who do we call when we have to say your son was killed by a Terrorist who was let into the country because people like on here thought it was unfair – which one of you do I come see when a terrorist kills your son or daughter? you won’t be able to say anything to President Trump.
Jerry slings cowardly nonsense.
That’s from the notorious left-wing outfit they call the Cato Institute, Jerry. You should crawl under your bed with your device of choice (so you’ll feel safe) and read it.
And then, do a little of your own research and come back here and answer this question: Since 9/11/2001, how many Americans have been killed in terrorist attacks in the US by people from the seven countries on the ban list?
How many people in the world have died from catastrophic global warming?
“How many people in the world have died from catastrophic global warming?”
How many folks died in January twisters?
Global warming is more correctly called climate change. The extremes as we cycle through are getting worse.
So go tell the folks in Mississippi that global warming isn’t happening.
Even the most radical proponents of catastrophic global warming refuse to define any single incident as an example of “climate change.” People have been dying from the affects of extreme weather for the entire duration of mankind’s existence.
As a quick follow up to that hastily composed response:
The statistical example provided by Mr Salzmann is pure nonsense. But for argument sake, let’s take it at face value for the moment. Many on the progressive left have been arguing that terrorist attacks of American targets are the predictable byproduct (blowback) of US foreign policy in the Muslim world. In support of this contention, they cite polls which reveal a certain level of abiding animus for the US throughout the Muslim world. Although it can be said that, prior to the attacks of 9/11, the odds against an American being murdered in a terrorist attack on US soil were astronomical – the attacks happened never-the-less in keeping with the purported expectations of those who subscribe to the theory of blowback.
In hindsight, would you say that President Bush was negligent in ignoring intelligence warnings of hijacked airplanes being possibly used by bin Laden to attack targets in United States in the run-up to 9/11?
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/16/us/bush-was-warned-bin-laden-wanted-to-hijack-planes.html
Even though the odds cited by Cato pale in comparison to those prior to 9/11, the progressive left is universal in its condemnation of Bush for ignoring the potential of terrorist attack by al Qaeda. Yet, when Trump takes modest action to temporarily limit immigration from seven openly hostile Muslim nations for the purpose of reviewing the effectiveness of existing vetting procedures, his caution is universally condemned by the same critics.
You have no credibility at all. I’ve certainly had issues with nuf, but except for the Truther nonsense, on political matters he’s usually rational, and he is so here. You by contrast, virtually never are and do not appear capable of being so. But then, you are an ardent Trumper, and that’s who and what those nearly always are.
You speak for no one but yourself – and even then without a level of integrity that would concern me.
“I’ve certainly had issues with nuf, but except for the Truther nonsense,”
Says the person who always wanted to be a scientist …
shorter Mona:
I do not understand any of the basic laws of motion so I’ll trust whatever the NIST floats.
The government has no reason to subvert any investigation.
0 and of the attacks that have left Americans dead not one of those countries is on the banned list.
In these turbulent times we have to be careful with how we express our dissatisfaction with the new administration True, the new order excludes Muslims almost exclusively but, and here’s the catch, how many other countries will be added in the future? So I propose we now have a semi-inclusive Muslim ban from those states listed in the order; apparently Christians may be admitted but it’s not really clear yet. So in all this confusion it’s hard to not see this as a Muslim ban, at least from those states listed. Thanx for all the fearless reporting The Intercept does in these turbulent times.
“In these turbulent times we have to be careful with how we express our dissatisfaction with the new administration ”
Just ask Kim Kardashian. Her plane was boarded by storm-troopers in body armor.
All she did was tweet mean things about Trump and she got the full-blown Malignant Narcissist response.
how is it a Muslim ban if Muslims from other countries can enter as usual? Confusing, this
Baffles me as well..but then again, the Regressive left knows it just has to make accusations because they are not real journalists.
Mr. Trump promised his followers a Muslim ban and most of them will be fooled, perhaps suffering only a bit of mild confusion. He also has to avoid damaging his own business interests, which means it can’t be a total ban. And he has to enrage the left.
So far he is batting 3 for 3, and I have to give him full marks, less than two weeks into his new job.
How is it a Muslim ban? Because our “fearless leader” said so and tried to make it legal. Isn’t the term “Regressive Left” a bit of an oxymoron, or do you need to look that one up? It’s a bit like saying “Right Wing Journalist”. The two just don’t go together.
I agree. There are something like 47 other Muslim countries that are not banned. If this were a ban on Muslims, then ALL Muslims would be banned. Words matter, Ryan Devereaux.
Stop quoting Trump. We know what he said. It’s Trump’s idea of a Muslin ban. Or perhaps Bannon’s just as the War on Women was most likely started by Pence. Bannon is a sicko and Pence is a religious nut.
It’s a Muslim ban because everyone being banned is a Muslim.
Exactly, RJ. You wouldn’t think it would be so hard for (some) people to understand.
I stand corrected. All citizens from the targeted countries are under the 90 day ban.
I guess the term, “Muslim Ban”, is like the term, “Islamic Terrorism,” even though the Islam of an overwhelming majority of Muslims does not sanction terrorism, nor do overwhelming majority of Muslims commit terrorism, and most victims of terrorism committed by those who claim to be Muslims are actually Muslims.
How does this ban make the US safer if we already had extreme vetting in place? History has proven we did, since not one of those countries has produced a terror attack on US soil, ever. That was the supposed reason for this ban. Confusing , this.