It's all pure entertainment at this point, to take it seriously is to go mad.

P. S. Might want to edit the subject if you want to get the usual suspects in a lather ... the postal code is HI.

What the helll are you talking about? See that's why we post links.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

I am not posting links just to annoy you and others that say "where are the links?" :)

for a bunch of well informed readers of the media its not beyond the wit of man to figure out what I'm alluding to.......

Oh I found it but I refuse to comment without links. Suck it.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

I'm I refuse to be pressured - it is a total overreach of your position to insist on links............

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

This was the reason for the impeachment thread I started. It just veered off course.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

just you wait...it's coming ;)

Actually, we already had the outrage with the first ban. The first ban was likely to pass under a SCOTUS with Gorsuch on it, so they pulled back. This second one goes without saying the same activist judges would pull the same stunt reading beyond the letter of the law. I doubt the 9th circuit will reinstate it, but I do see this going before the SCOTUS. There is too much precedent and established law that makes this on sound footing. Even liberal commentators are saying as such. Even if they don't agree with the law.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

Also, Trump is going to continue to get shat on by pretty much anyone except his most ardent ball-washers over this for the same damn reasons:

1. The ban is simply a dumb idea. His own military leaders say so.
2. His messaging is total shit. The courts called him out on his (and surrogate's) prior statements of intent with regards to establishing a muslim ban. What's he do after his second shitty order gets shot down? Argue at a rally yesterday that he didn't even want the second order - that he wanted to stick with the first one (in literal opposition to what's written in the second order). Dude's off his rocker.

Lastly - the statements regarding his power to do this - yes, he has it. No, it is not unreviewable. Otherwise he could order the opening of internment camps for brown people for national security reasons. How would we prevent it if he doesn't have to show how his order improves national security?

Haha, we wrote our comments at the same time and I basically addressed yours without even knowing.

Let me reiterate - I agree he has the power to do something like this. I also believe that power is not without limits - see my example about internment camps.

This is so absurdly stupid on his part. He is only strengthening the court ruling. Doesn't he have some legal advisers that tell him to shut up?

And this is why I laugh when people say he's being crafty. He isn't. He's not smart enough. His team is smart, the problem is that they can't stop him from talking.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

No sweat. The Supreme Court will eventually reverse the liberal, Obama-appointed judge's error.

Of course it is reviewable. But are you seriously comparing a ban on travel from countries with exemptions for visa holders and green card holders, or handled on a case by case basis with locking up US citizens in internment camps?

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

Courts extending their view beyond the letter of the law is a dangerous precedent. Let's say that the SCOTUS does say this amounts to a "muslim ban" based on his rhetoric. This could be a double edged sword. Basically judges will be able to make up what they believe is intent based on unrelated items. On the positive note, it may well be the object lesson he needs to shut up more. If his loud mouth costs him victories in the court, he will likely stop saying some stuff in order to win, it would also make his base even more rabid in that they see corrupt courts who are not following the constitution and letter of the law, but introducing fallible and disputable logic into major court decisions.

In other words, judges interpreting the intent beyond the letter of the law creates rule not by law, but men.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

I just read that a second federal judge in Maryland has also blocked the ban.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

I thought the second judge only blocked certain provisions. That is a whole lot more reasonable if you find fault in specific provisions.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

I believe the MD judge focused on a single paragraph as opposed to the whole thing.

President Trump... right, wrong, or indifferent... is getting taken to the checks and balances woodshed. His first 50+ days has been an absolute embarrassment, and not just with the travel ban stuff. Looks like the healthcare bill is all but dead on the vine and his twitter accusations are pitifully petty, unpresidential, and absurd. Then there's his staff of fools that trip over themselves whenever they speak.

This comes from me, a political agnostic who hopes he does well and who agrees with a lot of his policies and ideas.

Those homers at Fox News gave him a B grade for his first 50 days. I'm not sure what the hell they are observing but my unbiased opinion so far is he's done a terrible job through the first 50+ days. I will give him credit for actually trying to do something and sticking with plans and promises but the execution and decision making has been a joke.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

Not quite. I'm saying that if we argue that it is unreviewable (as many have) - then what's to stop him from doing exactly that? I guess in that case there simply is no limit on his power as long as he attaches the words "national security" to anything. Perhaps you have not argued along those lines but if you'd like I'll go find examples of many on here and of course out there in the wild claiming that the courts have no right to question the order.

Furthermore, he literally just said himself that he would prefer the first iteration which DID affect legal residents (green cards) as well as visa holders. Are you going to tell me that once again, we should not take him at his word? Should we have taken him and his admin at their word when they (falsely) claimed that green card holders were not affected by the first ban?

Overall, it's just a total fucking amateur circus.

I hope they pass this shit sandwich of a "healthcare overhaul" as is. I'm not concerned for my rich white guy status in the least. Heck, I wish Ryan gets his way and gets to take apart Medicare and even privatize SS as well. Then, when the elderly and poor start rioting (or dying in greater numbers) I'll smugly remind everyone who cheered after November 8, 2016: "elections have consequences (you poor asshole)"

Hey, the original judge who stopped the original order is on board this time.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...tory/article/2617662

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

I hear ya. I have much fewer issues with this as written than I had with the first one. But I think it's time to stop pretending this is about national security. The President's own words 2 days ago make that abundantly clear. Despite being told by courts that what he says matters (once again despite what many claim), he goes out and says that he doesn't like this watered down version and actually prefers the first version. Which the administration basically acknowledged was junk by issuing the second one.

The President is a spiteful amateur and even though I want this country to do well - I want to see him fall flat on that stupid orange face over and over until he stops being an ignorant dick. I feel the same way about school bullies. I know it's wrong to beat children but I love seeing a bully get his ass beat.

You won't get any arguments there. I think he is a guy who has never been held negatively accountable for what he said, and even benefited in most cases. So he feels no need to hold back. Being 70 years old, it is a whole lot harder to unlearn old tricks, no matter how bad you need to.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden