More protests at airports

[Bluegrasscard]

"What do you think of Donald Trump?"

 

"I like him."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tY1vXpqhQo

 

 

"But I do not know about this policy. He is the president. I am a normal person."

 

These quotes did not make the newsreel...

 

People usually 'like' clarity and decisiveness.

[Fear the Nation]

"What do you think of Donald Trump?"

 

"I like him."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tY1vXpqhQo

 

 

"But I do not know about this policy. He is the president. I am a normal person."

 

These quotes did not make the newsreel...

 

People usually 'like' clarity and decisiveness.

 

I have the highest disdain for our media. They are feeding bull to the people and it needs to stop. No wonder you have so many lunitics running around like they've lost their mind. Nothing but slant, misleading stories, headlines with no substance, or outright lies.

[kygirl]

Here's a question(s) to which I don't know the answer.

 

Does the President have business interests with any of these countries? Does he have business interests with countries that could/should be on the list - e.g. Saudi Arabia - but are not?

 

I don't know the answer. The reason I pose the question is because they were talking about this on First Take and referenced said business interests/lack thereof.

 

Even as President Trump takes steps to restrict visitors from some majority-Muslim countries, he and his family continue to do business in some of the others.

 

Ethics experts question whether that might indicate conflicts between Trump's business interests and his role as U.S. president.

 

The executive action, "Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States," targets seven nations: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Trump has no business interests in those countries.

 

One other thing they have in common, as NPR's Greg Myre writes: "No Muslim extremist from any of these places has carried out a fatal attack in the U.S. in more than two decades."

 

The 19 terrorists in the Sept. 11 attacks were from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon and the United Arab Emirates, Myre points out. They are among the Muslim-majority countries not affected by Trump's immigration freeze, but where Trump does business.

 

He has significant commercial interests in Turkey and Azerbaijan, is developing properties in Indonesia and Dubai, and has formed companies in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. His daughter Ivanka said in 2015 that the company was looking at "multiple opportunities in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Qatar, Saudi Arabia — the four areas where we are seeing the most

 

Critics said it appears that Trump is picking favorites, overlooking terrorist links in countries such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey that have their own history of terrorism.

 

And there appear to be conflict-of-interest questions, which could raise legal and constitutional concerns for the Trump White House.

 

Norman Eisen, a former ethics adviser to President Obama and a current fellow in governance studies at the Brookings Institution, told NPR in an interview:

"I don't believe that our Constitution allows the president to order State Department and other U.S. government employees to discriminate between otherwise identical people, favoring those from countries he likes because they give him unconstitutional foreign emoluments, and punishing those from other countries that do not pay such personal and illegal tribute to him."

Emoluments are gifts. A provision of the U.S. Constitution, called the emoluments clause, prohibits U.S. officials from taking gifts of value from foreign officials or governments.

 

As Trump Restricts Visitors From Some Majority-Muslim Countries, His Family Does Business In Others : NPR

[Jesse James]

If you guys have not figured it out, Trump means business. Now with America being so liberal the past 8 years its a shock to alot of people who are not Globalists at heart. I for one agree with the President so far and what he has/is doing is why I became a Trump voter.

[mcpapa]

I don't know the answer to whether he has business dealings in the other countries but doesn't the U.S. consider the other surrounding countries not barred as allies. Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt = all allies. Iran, Sudan and the rest = not so much.

 

Weren't these same 7 countries labeled as "countries of concern" by the Obama administration? It is my understanding that this was the basis for Trump choosing these seven.

 

Trump chose them because Obama did?

 

Stop the presses.:lol:

[TAC]

"I lock my doors at night, not because I hate others, but because I love my family"

 

Saw that quote tonight.

[Fear the Nation]

BREAKING : Guess Who the Lead Plaintiff in President Trump’s “Islamic Ban” Lawsuit is? – TruthFeed

[Bluegrasscard]

Visa Interview Waiver Program background.

 

One of the clauses in the EO.

 

Sec. 8. Visa Interview Security. (a) The Secretary of State shall immediately suspend the Visa Interview Waiver Program and ensure compliance with section 222 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1222, which requires that all individuals seeking a nonimmigrant visa undergo an in-person interview, subject to specific statutory exceptions.

 

Is there material evidence that this Waiver program was being abused?

 

House Leaders Press President Obama on Administration’s Unilateral Changes to Visa Waiver Law - Committee on Foreign Affairs

 

 

In the letter, the Members affirm that the Obama Administration’s exemptions for journalists, humanitarian workers, and people doing business in certain countries of concern are contrary to the plain language in the law and were expressly rejected by Congress during negotiations with administration officials. The members demand that the President’s administration provide detailed information to Congress on the individuals who are granted waivers to come to the U.S. through the Visa Waiver Program. They also call on the President to provide any documentation regarding the legal basis of authority he believes he is relying on to exempt these people from the law.

 

 

 

 

What there a specific country where the issue of Visa Waiver Program was an are of focus?

 

Iran.

 

The President's Waiver of Restrictions on the Visa Waiver Program | Center for Immigration Studies

 

 

Support Was Broad and Bipartisan. These provisions were first passed in the form of U.S. House bill H.R. 158 on a lopsided bipartisan vote of 407-19 on December 9, 2015, before they were incorporated into the omnibus spending bill and then signed by the president. As a group of House leaders observed, because the White House participated actively in negotiating the final text of the bill and expressed support for it, it was reasonable to expect that the provisions would be faithfully enforced.³

 

Obama Administration Immediately Caves To Iranian Demands. Within weeks of the passage of the new rules, the government of Iran formally declared its objections, suggesting that the new rules violate the recently concluded and highly controversial nuclear "non-treaty" agreement between Iran and the United States and other nations, and that they will adversely affect "economic, cultural, scientific, and tourism relations". Presumably they meant that Iranian dual nationals or other VWP country citizens who wish to travel to Iran might be discouraged from doing so because they would then lose their VWP privileges for the United States. This is, at best, highly speculative.

 

Yet on December 19, Secretary of State John Kerry sent a letter to his Iranian counterpart, Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif, assuring him that the administration would adhere to its treaty commitments and pledging to use a variety of immigration "tools" to facilitate travel to Iran, including the authority to waive the new VWP restrictions.

Edited January 31, 2017 by Bluegrasscard
Add Iran information

[Bluegrasscard]

Can mistakes happen? Of course.

 

How bad can the "mistakes" be? What if someone who is to be deported is actually granted citizenship instead? What problem could that cause? As citizen someone who was to be ejected from the country can now get a security clearance or become a law enforcement officer, etc.

 

What if this happened over 800 times?

 

More than 8

[Bluegrasscard]

I keep seeing the posts about judges who barred deportation related to the EO.

 

Unless there is another EO in play this is confusing. This is because the EO on the enforcing Visa requirements (and that is all it really does) has no mention of the word 'deport' or any derivation of the word.

 

So maybe the order uses another phrase to indicate people will be ejected forcefully from the country? i.e. maybe some of the following:

 

'return', 'returned', 'returning'? No.

 

'eject', 'ejection'? No.

 

'origin', 'country of origin'? No.

 

'sent' 'sent back'? No.

 

So there is nothing in the order about 'deporting', sending back, returning, etc. anyone who is already in this country.

 

So why the judges orders - beyond those held up airports. And supposedly these are all cleared now. The order anticipated these situations and as expected - they resolved relatively quickly.

 

So now it appears no one who is in this country will be affected - So long as they do not leave the country and and attempt to return and are from the effected countries without getting proper, authorized visas approved. No one that is currently in the country appears to be under threat of deportation just due to this EO, correct?

[Mitch Rapp]

Radical Islam is not a race. Enough with the racism chants already.

[All Tell]

The more I think about it the more hypocritical I believe the "protesters" are. I don't remember one demonstration against Obama's change in policy regarding Cuban refugees or even one whisper that it was illegal for him to do it.

[Bluegrasscard]

Interesting. Issues were brewing well before this weekend....due to tightening up of visa requirements of certain countries (guess which ones are part of the group). This was happening before January 20th.

 

Iranian​ Americans dismayed by discrimination in new visa regulations | US news | The Guardian

 

Measures to tighten the US visa waiver programme were passed through Congress last monthas part of the omnibus spending bill. People from 38 countries including Britain and France could previously visit the US for up to 90 days without a visa. But thanks to a provision folded into the bill, those citizens must now obtain a visa if they are dual Iranian, Iraqi, Sudanese or Syrian citizens.

 

...

 

“From what we understand, adding Iran to the list was at the 11th hour. It was originally Iraq and Syria, then at the 11th hour they attached Iran to it, so it just smacks of somebody with an agenda that brought this about. There is no way to logically come to the conclusion that Iran belonged to that list.

 

 

...

 

Iranian Americans do not have the option of renouncing their Iranian ancestry to circumvent the problem. Iran considers anyone born in the country, or born to an Iranian father, to be an Iranian national, leaving many Americans of Iranian descent with no choice over their own dual identities.

 

(Sidenote - so Valerie Jarrent IS an Iranian citizen?)

 

 

VWP website with interesting specifics about the 2015 Act where the 7 countries are specifically named.

 

Visa Waiver Program

 

From above:

 

Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015

Under the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015, travelers in the following categories are no longer eligible to travel or be admitted to the United States under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP):

 

• Nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to or been present in Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, or Yemen on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited exceptions for travel for diplomatic or military purposes in the service of a VWP country).
  
• Nationals of VWP countries who are also nationals of Iran, Iraq, Sudan, or Syria.
  

[LIPTON BASH]

Trump chose them because Obama did?

 

Stop the presses.:lol:

 

That is exactly why he chose them. It is a good political move. In a political debate it weakens the liberal argument. This whole nonsense about business interests is easily argued away because they took the foot print from Obama. It was a logical approach .

 

As I've stated I would of preferred congress to act. But from a pure politcal stand point it was pretty intelligent to base the ban off of Obama .