THE ERA OF TRUMP

[Speaker to Animals]

Democrats are really playing a shitty hand.

What do you think the odds are that we will see another terror attack from one of these people the democrats just ensured would be allowed in this country? If that happens, their entire position on this immigration issue will become untenable and Americans will turn on them.

It will take one more shooting or bombing as a result of their policies and Trump will have them politically crucified in the public square for it.

[de officiis]

Democrats are really playing a shitty hand.

What do you think the odds are that we will see another terror attack from one of these people the democrats just ensured would be allowed in this country? If that happens, their entire position on this immigration issue will become untenable and Americans will turn on them.

It will take one more shooting or bombing as a result of their policies and Trump will have them politically crucified in the public square for it.

That's certainly possible. I'm sure if it happened, the Left would claim that Trump's order inflamed them and that he's the one to blame.

Trump and his team need to play smarter, or they're going to get bogged down into a legal morass. As recent events have shown. I'm willing to cut him some slack because he has no government executive experience, and I think the American public will give him the opportunity proceed with his policies and see how things go. But he needs to get better lawyers.

[Speaker to Animals]

Democrats are really playing a shitty hand.

What do you think the odds are that we will see another terror attack from one of these people the democrats just ensured would be allowed in this country? If that happens, their entire position on this immigration issue will become untenable and Americans will turn on them.

It will take one more shooting or bombing as a result of their policies and Trump will have them politically crucified in the public square for it.

That's certainly possible. I'm sure if it happened, the Left would claim that Trump's order inflamed them and that he's the one to blame.

Trump and his team need to play smarter, or they're going to get bogged down into a legal morass. As recent events have shown. I'm willing to cut him some slack because he has no government executive experience, and I think the American public will give him the opportunity proceed with his policies and see how things go. But he needs to get better lawyers.

I think focusing on the legal battles is how the left will lose. It's easy for you to get into it because you are a lawyer. But I don't think many lawyers realize how odious all this comes across to the American people.

[de officiis]

Democrats are really playing a shitty hand.

What do you think the odds are that we will see another terror attack from one of these people the democrats just ensured would be allowed in this country? If that happens, their entire position on this immigration issue will become untenable and Americans will turn on them.

It will take one more shooting or bombing as a result of their policies and Trump will have them politically crucified in the public square for it.

That's certainly possible. I'm sure if it happened, the Left would claim that Trump's order inflamed them and that he's the one to blame.

Trump and his team need to play smarter, or they're going to get bogged down into a legal morass. As recent events have shown. I'm willing to cut him some slack because he has no government executive experience, and I think the American public will give him the opportunity proceed with his policies and see how things go. But he needs to get better lawyers.

I think focusing on the legal battles is how the left will lose. It's easy for you to get into it because you are a lawyer. But I don't think many lawyers realize how odious all this comes across to the American people.

You could be right--it's a little hard to predict how all of this will play out. But I think most folks agree that we are "a nation of laws, not of men" and that courts play an important role in ensuring that the actions of the Executive comply with federal law and the Constitution. To me, the ultimate question at hand is, what is the most effective way to protect the country from the threat of Islamic terrorism.

[Alexander PhiAlipson]

Even when a Supreme Court decision goes "my way" by a five-four decision, I don't like the fact that one appointed official can make a potentially huge impact on the law of the land; but I accept it (whether "my way" or not) because that's their role, however badly played. Federal judges here, federal judges there, agreeing and disagreeing, starting and stopping, fast-tracking or delaying--that's where I lose heart. Why is something legal when one president does it--without intervening new law--yet illegal when the next president does the same thing? Unfortunately, I know the answer and it has nothing to do with The Constitution.
And the best explanation we'll ever hear is, "It's complicated, you wouldn't understand."

[Fife]

Well, the game is still the game. Nothing has changed that. Either play the game or get kicked to the curb.

STA is certainly right that the DNC is holding a shit hand right now.

DEO is certainly right that the Hair-god could use some better advice regarding playing his cards on this immigration dust-up, at least. IMNSHO.

[TheReal_ND]

I'm game. I'm here all day. Let's hair it.

[de officiis]

Even when a Supreme Court decision goes "my way" by a five-four decision, I don't like the fact that one appointed official can make a potentially huge impact on the law of the land; but I accept it (whether "my way" or not) because that's their role, however badly played. Federal judges here, federal judges there, agreeing and disagreeing, starting and stopping, fast-tracking or delaying--that's where I lose heart. Why is something legal when one president does it--without intervening new law--yet illegal when the next president does the same thing? Unfortunately, I know the answer and it has nothing to do with The Constitution.
And the best explanation we'll ever hear is, "It's complicated, you wouldn't understand."

I wouldn't worry too much about district judges reaching different conclusions. That is extremely common and it's why we have circuit courts of appeal and the SCOTUS.

[TheReal_ND]

Why did you send me those books deo? Is there a particular reason or is it something you just like sharing?

[StCapps]

Well, the game is still the game. Nothing has changed that. Either play the game or get kicked to the curb.

STA is certainly right that the DNC is holding a shit hand right now.

DEO is certainly right that the Hair-god could use some better advice regarding playing his cards on this immigration dust-up, at least. IMNSHO.

A federal judge would have struck this down no matter how good advice Trump received and continues to receive, the establishment is out to get him and will grasp at straws to do it. There is nothing unconstitutional about the travel ban, VISA holders don't have due process rights and some Republicuck judge used as it as an excuse anyway. When a Democrat does it then it's perfectly legal but when a Republican does it then it's unconstitutional somehow, give me a break.

This Washington State judge is fucking moron and he did nothing more than delay the inevitable when his ruling is overruled by a higher court in short order. As long as Trump doesn't fold to an obvious bluff, his hand is plenty good enough to win and win big.