Saw some snippets. His refusal to condemn Putin directly as a war criminal when questioned by Rubio was rather interesting. Tillerson will be saying whatever makes him look best...he's hardly going to want people to think he's pro-Russia, is he?
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Saw some snippets. His refusal to condemn Putin directly as a war criminal when questioned by Rubio was rather interesting. Tillerson will be saying whatever makes him look best...he's hardly going to want people to think he's pro-Russia, is he?
Cheap labor and even trump had Mexicans working for him here in Atlantic City on both casinos, the first generation of Mexicans are hard working people and if I had the power I will let them stay in this country.
It was the right thing to do, as he's not going to call him a war criminal a mere weeks before going to meet him to negotiate things. Talk about poisoning the well right off the bat. Tillerson did what he had to, to advance Exxon's interests in Russia, even if that included grip-n-grin photo ops with Putin. He knows he has to do the same for America now, and with a much broader set of policy objectives than simply securing drilling rights.
we agree on somethingDisgusting. Outrage over this is well and truly deserved. Even Republicans have always maintained that legal immigrants are not the problem. People spend 19+ years at times to get the green card. Then to just destroy their lives on pure prejudice against people of certain religion and countries is shameful. It does not matter if he if fulfilling his election promise, this should be opposed.
I don't agree with everything trump is saying, some may be good - only time will tell and some not so good, I know too many illegals where I live (Brazilians mostly) and they are good people (damn I sound like him again), besides when Portugal beat France the Brazilians and Mexicans celebrated with us in the Portuguese bar, then my nephew is from Guatemala...he needs to approach the illegals punishing the people who gives them jobs, paid with cash no taxes paid and really low wages.
Don't be ridiculous Raoul. Green Card holders might not have the same rights as citizens, but it's always been pretty firm ground on the pathway to citizenship. It's grotesque to spring this on them, whether it was previously alluded to or not.
There's a delete button Mike!
One problem that also screws this all up, to my understanding, is that at the point of departure its not US immigration making a decision, rather the airlines who would be on the hook for carrying people back if they're denied entry in the US. So if faced with an unclear order, their reaction is to just deny boarding first, figure it out later.
I disagree with the policy and think it may be amended once the lawsuits hit the system, but I reject this faux outrage by people who are suddenly incensed that something that was campaigned on for a year is not being implemented.
That's before Trump changed it from a Muslim ban to banning entry to people from high risk countries, which is country specific rather than religious.
We were outraged then too.
This is not what Pence was referring to. This is a country specific ban not a ban on Muslims.
Just because something has been campaigned for does not mean outrage expressed at it's implementation is faux surely?
Faux may be the wrong word. But really no one should be surprised or outraged after knowing this was coming for over a year.
No one thought it would be applied as liberally as it seems to be. The assumption was that it's tough rhetoric, but in reality it would be the US refusing new refugees.
If he'd said he was going to imprison every black person and then went on to do it would there be no right to be outraged by that just because he's said he'd do it?
Is it true that green card holders are being turned away too? Not just fresh visa applicants?
If so, what about those that are already in the US and working? Will they be deported?
If so, what about those that are already in the US and working? Will they be deported?
Beyond being a hypothetical, the two aren't remotely similar, neither morally nor practically. This is a security policy to restrict access to immigrants from countries on the terror list, most of which have been classed state sponsors of terror for many years preceding the announcement.
I think this only applies for people entering the country.
So someone working in the US who was visiting their home country can still go back? Or are they fecked?
For a start that's shifting the goal posts because a moment ago your argument was that there shouldn't be any outrage because he'd said he was doing it in advance.
Secondly, we're talking about people who already legally live in the US being denied entry to the country. These people have already been through a rigourous visa and greencard process.
Blanket bans are outrageous. Whether there was advance notice or not.
Its a temporary policy (90 days?) until our country's representatives can figure out what hell is going on.
As I said, I'm no expert on UK politics, so apologize for missing the 'referendum' part!
Although still I would say apples and oranges. Having a physical barrier to secure one sovereign nation from another, especially when you have so much narcotics and criminal activity pouring in through there, is a legitimate act. People freaking out without paying attention that these walls and fences were already there before Trump, so I don't see what's all that wall outrage is about.
Possibly because they'd been influenced by the arguments (made by, amonst others, you!) that Trump's more extreme promises were empty rhetoric and he'd be relatively rational and liberal once he got the job?
Ah ok. Still unfortunate for someone living/working in the US who might be affected by it.
Well yes, its a bit absurd to be relatively calm yesterday and outraged today when all of us have known for over a year that this was in the cards if he got elected.
I agree about your 2nd point, the policy was always supposed to be aimed at new applicants not existing, vetted green card holders.
If I understand correctly, only fresh visa applicants from those countries. Green card holders were already vetted and approved by homeland security, so that wouldn't apply to them.
That's what I had initially thought, but I saw
I still think he will be forced to be more moderate if he wants to get things done. For example, he's not likely to get congressional funding to build a wall if a contingent of Republicans along with all Democrats think its a ridiculous idea that spends money on something that won't accomplish anything. Same thing with Russia policy, he is going to have to eventually moderate his views on befriending Putin because a section of GOP members will go apeshit and start voting against his other policies, and he desperately needs their votes in the Senate especially. And once again with repealing Obamacare, which more and more Republicans are increasingly (privately) growing nervous about. Once this initial period of post election momentum wears off, he is going to have to deal with the reality of compromise.
How many terrorist attacks by those counties have happened on US soil in the last 10 years?
Very few, but that's obviously not the way they look at things. They view it more in terms of what has happened in Europe over the past couple of years.
As I said, I'm no expert on UK politics, so apologize for missing the 'referendum' part!
Although still I would say apples and oranges. Having a physical barrier to secure one sovereign nation from another, especially when you have so much narcotics and criminal activity pouring in through there, is a legitimate act. People freaking out without paying attention that these walls and fences were already there before Trump, so I don't see what's all that wall outrage is about.
That would be because you still haven't looked into the issue properly.
A quick run-down of some of the very real issues with it:
- It will cost a ridiculous amount of money
- It won't work because people come in through airports and overstay their visas
- Drugs already get through the walls via tunnels or being literally shot over the walls
- People also already get over the walls with ladders, an increasing number of which have been found lately
- It's utterly pointless to build in many areas along the border because it's uninhabitable
- It's utterly pointless to build in many areas because the terrain will make it incredibly hard, nigh impossible, to build there
- Some Americans, due to the vagaries of where lines on maps have been drawn in the past, will actually inevitably end up on the wrong side of the wall. Google that topic if you don't believe me.
- Land will have to be purchased from people who don't want to sell it (and in some cases actively profit from illegal immigration) and the wall will be held up in those areas in the courts for years.
The list goes on and on, seriously. Get a clue.
The ban includes green-card holders? Didn't expect that. So legal residents are going to get turned away purely because they went on holiday at the wrong time?
So they are happy to veto Obama's efforts to stop the mentally ill buying weapons and shooting little children to pieces but will back Trump's efforts to stop Muslims coming into the country (from countries Trump doesn't have business interests in).
Congratulations to all involved, America is great again after the tyranny of the nasty black man who aggressively tried to make life better for the average citizen is finally overcome.
Hmm. I'd take this with a pinch of salt until I see a more reliable source. However, I can see the rational behind that. Green card holders that traveled to the countries on the list may have to go through some sort of vetting upon returning to the US, but I really doubt that they will be turned away automatically.
You might be right. I hope you are. I also hope you won't accuse people of "faux outrage" if he does end up getting any of those policies across the line.
This was funny when he was just Donald Trump, but now that he's President Trump it's fecking pathetic. A man who should be focused on domestic and international policy is acting like a ranting rent-a-gob.
- Status