Monday Night Massacre: Trump fires acting Attorney General over refusal to defend refugee order

[Gabriel Maxwell]

We don't even have enough resources to properly feed, house, educate, employ, and medically care for all of our own citizens, let alone fleeing droves of "hapless" immigrants who want all of the benefits of being a citizen, but are unwilling to be productive citizens of this country, or worse, wish to do us harm.

So the argument conveniently switches from safety to cost. Either way - wrong.

The temporary $1.5 billion annual cost - two thirds of which goes to unattended children - is reimbursed as refugees do become productive citizens, many of whom are likely to end up becoming small business owners. They are cost-neutral or cost-positive.

But some folks would rather waste a non-refundable $1.8 billion on Melania not being able to stand Donald.

And someone needs to "'splain" to all the Hollywood snowflakes and protesters without any coping skills that like it or not, all of the political statements during award shows and protests in the world won't make Hillbilly Clinton president.

It's Trump, the Queen of All Snowflakes who can't seem to come to terms with his EC-only win and 3 months after the elections keeps perpetuating that absurd lie about massive voter fraud.

Such fraud - if it had happened - would've of course abolished the results of the election, which just goes to show what an insecure fool he is to keep bringing it up.

And whining about crowd size coverage at the CIA? Fragile man-child.

1) Unemployment under Obama declined from 7.8% when he took office to 4.6% when he left.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...yment-is-positively-clintonian/?client=safari

2) Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse and a stock market in free fall and left it with a 235% return.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.forb...e-obama-stock-markets-235-rise/?client=safari

3) Osama Bin Laden is dead as a door nail...a feat the Bush administration somehow failed to achieved in 8 years. And yet, the "Obummer" administration is somehow the epic disaster.

Comrade Tramputin's supporters prefer their alternative facts, i.e. lies. They did a survey and most of them think the unemployment under Obama went up and the stock market went down. Up is down and down is up in that bleak Trumpland.

I like how you put refugees fleeing in terror in quotation marks, as if most of them are lying.

The quotation marks truly speak volumes about the poster - a high level of ignorance and a very low level of empathy for fellow human beings. Helping unfortunate people fleeing the horrors of war is what every decent civilized society does. Obviously not if you're governed by greed and primitivism.

 

[Frank Underwood]

Some people are comparing the bans Trump implemented to a ban Obama did in 2011, but they should read this excerpt from USA Today first:

President Donald Trump defended his sweeping immigration policy by calling it “similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.” That’s a faulty comparison.

There was a delay in processing Iraqi refugees in 2011 after it was discovered that two Iraqi refugees living in Kentucky had been involved in roadside bombing attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq. One of the refugee’s fingerprints were found on a detonation device in Iraq, prompting U.S. immigration, security and intelligence agencies to use federal databases to rescreen about 58,000 Iraqi refugees in the U.S. and more than 25,000 Iraqis who had been approved to enter the U.S., but had not yet been admitted, Department of Homeland Security officials testified at the time.

The Kentucky case not only caused a backlog in processing Iraqi refugees in 2011, but it also resulted in an overhaul of the refugee screening process.

The Obama administration’s actions were limited to one country and in response to a specific threat — the potential for other Iraqi refugees to take advantage of a flaw in the screening process.

By contrast, Trump ordered a far wider ban — albeit also temporary — without identifying a specific threat.

Source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ump-refugee-policy-comparison-obama/97247418/

1) Unemployment under Obama declined from 7.8% when he took office to 4.6% when he left.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...yment-is-positively-clintonian/?client=safari

2) Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse and a stock market in free fall and left it with a 235% return.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.forb...e-obama-stock-markets-235-rise/?client=safari

3) Osama Bin Laden is dead as a door nail...a feat the Bush administration somehow failed to achieved in 8 years. And yet, the "Obummer" administration is somehow the epic disaster.

I'm an equal opportunity critic of both parties, but I also believe in giving credit where credit is do. These are definitely a few of Obama's achievements.

And while the Affordable Care Act is not perfect, it still allowed millions of uninsured Americans to receive coverage. My step mother had cervical cancer, and could have potentially died had it not been for the ACA.

Trump's best decision thus far was withdrawing from the TPP. The rest of his agenda hinges on undoing the ACA, pushing through pipelines, arbitrarily banning countries from the US unless he does business with them, and sticking us with a $15 billion dollar tab for a wall that's impractical to build and expensive to maintain. This is four years worth of bad policies being pushed through in ten days thanks to executive orders.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

What are you talking about?? I have been calling Hillary a dolt for decades.

Then you turned right around and voted for the most colossal dolt of all.

It's always personal with you..

What are you talking about?

 

[McGarrett]

Then you turned right around and voted for the most colossal dolt of all.

I didn't vote for Hillary.

 

[McGarrett]

Its ok when my guy does it.

Racist when your guy does it.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

I didn't vote for Hillary.

Yes, she fully expected to lose the deplorable vote nationwide.

Its ok when my guy does it.

Racist when your guy does it.

Pure and disingenuous deflection.

 

[Frank Underwood]

If a President issues a temporary travel ban in order to fix a specific security threat, I would look at that as a reasonable action.

However, when a President indefinitely bans seven countries from the United States as a campaign promise to "keep out the Muslims," that is a clear cut case of religious discrimination. What specific threat do these countries pose to us? Fifteen of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, and they're not part of the travel ban. Nor is any other predominantly Muslim country Trump does business with.

All Trump cares about is his image and his business interests. When it comes to terrorism, I'm more afraid of dying in a mass shooting by an American than I am of a Muslim boogie man.

 

[McGarrett]

Again... It is ok if my guy does it... Not ok if your guy does it..

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Again... It is ok if my guy does it... Not ok if your guy does it..

Again...pure and disingenuous deflection.

 

[McGarrett]

Again...pure and disingenuous deflection.

It is if you are talking about one side..

But NOT if you talk about the other..

 

[Frank Underwood]

Again... It is ok if my guy does it... Not ok if your guy does it..

Show me the specific threat these seven nations pose, and I'll agree that it was the right decision. The fact that they're Muslim majority countries is not good enough. Trump isn't even consistent on this issue. He's certainly not banning the Muslim majority countries he does business with. The biggest terrorist attack on our soil was carried out by fifteen hijackers from Saudi Arabia, but the Saudis aren't banned from travelling here.

There are things I agree with Obama on, but I'm certainly not one to give him a pass. I think he was atrocious on foreign policy and surveillance. But issuing a temporary travel ban on one nation in order to fix an actual security threat is different from a blanket travel ban on seven countries. Trump claims that his travel bans are temporary as well, but if he's not working to fix a specific security issue, what will compel him to lift the ban?

 

[McGarrett]

Saul Alinsky stated, “There are 8 levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state. The first is the most important!”

1) Healthcare – Control healthcare and you control the people.

2) Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible. Poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.

3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

4) Gun Control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.

5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).

6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.

7) Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.

8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

It is if you are talking about one side..

But NOT if you talk about the other..

By George, I think you've got it!

 

[Frank Underwood]

I'm not sure what this has to do with travel bans, but I'll still give my two cents worth:

Saul Alinsky stated, “There are 8 levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state. The first is the most important!”

1) Healthcare – Control healthcare and you control the people.

By "control," you mean ensuring people live longer?

2) Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible. Poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.

Increase poverty how? By supporting slave wages, billion dollar bailouts to failed banks and corporations at the tax payer's expense, low taxes for the rich (or no taxes if you're Trump), subsidies to corporations, etc.

3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

It's also the result of the many wars we're in (which both parties support). Wages are taxed at a higher rate than capital gains, thus benefiting the rich more. And loopholes allow people like Trump to pay no taxes at all.

4) Gun Control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.

We still have guns. We also have an incredible amount of mass shootings, and a militarized police state to boot.

5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).

Only for people who are temporarily or permanently unable to take control of those things themselves. Politicians who complain about welfare for the poor are generally the ones advocating socialism for the rich.

6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.

Like the states that want to stop teaching evolution, and teach creationism instead. Or re-write the history books, particularly where slavery is concerned.

7) Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.

Because they're not supposed to be indoctrination centers. Religion is a personal choice that belongs in the private sector, not public.

8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

The rich incite people to wag their fingers at the poor while they make off with all of the loot. And since they're in the back pocket of both parties now, they continue to get away with it.

Outside of Bernie Sanders, few politicians care enough to tackle the real issue of wealth inequality.

 

[McGarrett]

@SueEllenRules!

I love that all my alerts come from you..

I mean I am so insignificant. . yet however, I go away for six weeks... And there you are... Begging me back..

 

[McGarrett]

I'm not sure what this has to do with travel bans, but I'll still give my two cents worth:


By "control," you mean ensuring people live longer?


Increase poverty how? By supporting slave wages, billion dollar bailouts to failed banks and corporations at the tax payer's expense, low taxes for the rich (or no taxes if you're Trump), subsidies to corporations, etc.


It's also the result of the many wars we're in (which both parties support). Wages are taxed at a higher rate than capital gains, thus benefiting the rich more. And loopholes allow people like Trump to pay no taxes at all.


We still have guns. We also have an incredible amount of mass shootings, and a militarized police state to boot.


Only for people who are temporarily or permanently unable to take control of those things themselves. Politicians who complain about welfare for the poor are generally the ones advocating socialism for the rich.


Like the states that want to stop teaching evolution, and teach creationism instead. Or re-write the history books, particularly where slavery is concerned.


Because they're not supposed to be indoctrination centers. Religion is a personal choice that belongs in the private sector, not public.


The rich incite people to wag their fingers at the poor while they make off with all of the loot. And since they're in the back pocket of both parties now, they continue to get away with it.

Outside of Bernie Sanders, few politicians care enough to tackle the real issue of wealth inequality.

So you have your interpretation on what it all means and how everything SHOULD be.. My interpretation is different.,

I have given Bernie some positive comments .. However he is another filthy rich politician, who did wind up playing ball with Hillary DESPITE being screwed.. So his principles were compramised. .

Besides in this culture of calling people out on hypocrisy. .Any filthy rich person who advocates how others should be taxed insanely to supplement the poor should live like a minimalist. .

I do.. You would be surprised if you came in my house and saw how we live by the essentials.. It is the most liberating lifestyle..(for me anyway)

My wife donates a lot of time and money to animal shelters, and that is our giveback..

Why don't Bernie, Hillary or any of these other "robin hood" advocates do the same?

We have done the church state thing enough...just another contradiction. .

 

[SueEllenRules!]

@SueEllenRules!

I love that all my alerts come from you..

I mean I am so insignificant. . yet however, I go away for six weeks... And there you are... Begging me back..

Who else would call you out on your bullsh!t?

 

[McGarrett]

Who else would call you out on your bullsh!t?

Nice deflection.. You have an unhealthy obsession. . I am not around and you feel the need to call...

I am flattered. .

 

[McGarrett]

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Nice deflection.. You have an unhealthy obsession. . I am not around and you feel the need to call...

I am flattered. .

How many times have I made you this offer: You don't reply to any of my posts or post on any thread I create and I'll do the same?? And you've declined every single time. Yet, somehow I'm the one who's obsessed with you.