Cable Forum
Page 22 of 22 « First 1218192021 22
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   U.S Election 2016 (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33702280)

martyh 04-02-2017 20:33
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35884016)
Bollocks, you don't know him, you don't know anything about him.

You have an opinion of him from what you have read from 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand from predominantly left wing media.

So you can't "as a person" and don't pretend you can.
Yes i have an opinion the same as you have an opinion ,and my opinion is that he is a racist,sexist, bully .Strangely enough people do form opinions about people from what they see on the news ,from what they see the person in question say on tv and from what they read about the person ,that's pretty much what everybody does

TheDaddy 04-02-2017 20:40
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35884016)
Bollocks, you don't know him, you don't know anything about him.

You have an opinion of him from what you have read from 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand from predominantly left wing media.

So you can't "as a person" and don't pretend you can.
The left wing media isn't in charge of his tweeting machine, you can learn quite a lot about him and his personality in 140 characters

Mick 04-02-2017 20:58
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35884018)
Yes i have an opinion the same as you have an opinion ,and my opinion is that he is a racist,sexist, bully
Glad you accept that is all it is and not stating it as fact.

ianch99 04-02-2017 21:51
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35883993)
If you say so, I disagree. Stop trying to force your views on me, it won't work.
He is not forcing his views on you. He is is saying you are factually incorrect. There is a difference.

Electorate:

Quote:
all the people in a country or area who are entitled to vote in an election
Kursk said:

Quote:
The President is acting on his word which is what his supporters, the majority of the electorate, expect ...
and he was wrong.

End of discussion.

Pierre 04-02-2017 22:12
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Well to be accurate he should have said " the majority of the electorite that cast a vote"

As the majority of the electorate may well be Trump supporters, but they just didn't vote on the day.

Mick 04-02-2017 22:25
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35884025)
He is not forcing his views on you. He is is saying you are factually incorrect. There is a difference.
But I'm not incorrect.



Quote:
Kursk said:



and he was wrong.

End of discussion.
Not end of discussion. Because you are wrong. It is States which determines the Presidency, not the entire voting population. Trump won more States, so Kursk is right based on how the democracy system works in the US.

Osem 04-02-2017 23:06
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
I think the main problem was that the Trump voters didn't really know what they were voting for whereas the Clinton voters did... :D

TheDaddy 04-02-2017 23:26
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35884028)
But I'm not incorrect.





Not end of discussion. Because you are wrong. It is States which determines the Presidency, not the entire voting population. Trump won more States, so Kursk is right based on how the democracy system works in the US.
Except he isn't right because that isn't what he said, I really don't get the issue here and neither does the donald, if he'd wanted to win the majority of votes he would've just done so

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/1...-tweets-232879

nomadking 04-02-2017 23:29
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
He is allowed in law and by the constitution to impose a ban in the first place, so what criteria would be acceptable? Anything other than a complete worldwide ban is going to have an inherent bias to one group or another.

Pierre 04-02-2017 23:38
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35884032)
I think the main problem was that the Trump voters didn't really know what they were voting for whereas the Clinton voters did... :D
Correct, There should be another vote to determine the outcome of the previous vote.

Gavin78 05-02-2017 01:27
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35884032)
I think the main problem was that the Trump voters didn't really know what they were voting for whereas the Clinton voters did... :D
:D lets have a vote to counter a voter to counter that vote oh well you know......

I actually like the guy

martyh 05-02-2017 09:01
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Appeals court has just rejected Trumps appeal

sky breaking news

Pierre 05-02-2017 09:03
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
And to high light the double standards we have this.

Does Trump beheading cartoon go too far?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38870587

I don't think it goes too far, it's a good cartoon but can you imagine the outrage if it was Muslim being depicted in this way? Let alone if it was a leader of one of the banned states being depicted in this way? They'd all be out burning the Stars and Stripes again.

Damien 05-02-2017 09:14
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35884049)
Appeals court has just rejected Trumps appeal

sky breaking news
I assume that's just saying they can't put the ban in whilst they await a proper ruling? Seems awfully fast otherwise.

martyh 05-02-2017 09:19
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35884050)
And to high light the double standards we have this.

Does Trump beheading cartoon go too far?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38870587

I don't think it goes too far, it's a good cartoon but can you imagine the outrage if it was Muslim being depicted in this way? Let alone if it was a leader of one of the banned states being depicted in this way? They'd all be out burning the Stars and Stripes again.

I agree it is a good cartoon and gets the message across ,it shows Trump beheading democracy ,can't see how it's double standards though.

---------- Post added at 09:19 ---------- Previous post was at 09:16 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35884051)
I assume that's just saying they can't put the ban in whilst they await a proper ruling? Seems awfully fast otherwise.
No that's the ruling by the appeal court ,the only avenue open for trump now is through the supreme court


Quote:
The US federal appeals court has rejected the Trump administration's request to immediately reinstate a travel ban blocked by a federal judge on Friday.
The ban targeted people from seven mainly Muslim countries.
State lawyers had argued it was unconstitutional and discriminatory.
The federal judge in Seattle had ruled against government lawyers' claims that states did not have the standing to challenge Mr Trump's executive order.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38872680

Damien 05-02-2017 09:24
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Huh. I always thought there were many courts and appeals before they got to the Supreme Court.

Pierre 05-02-2017 09:28
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35884052)

No that's the ruling by the appeal court ,the only avenue open for trump now is through the supreme court
No, they have just refused to unilaterally lift the ban at the request of the administration without a hearing.

You're knowledge of the system is truly breathtaking

Stephen 05-02-2017 09:42
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
I really can't stand Trump.

Been reading his tweets from the last few days and he really does behave like a stroppy teenager when things don't go his way. I also can't believe that as POTUS he is still allowed to send his own tweets without advice first, as some of the tweets are very dodgy.

Sooner they get something they can impeach him on the better I say.

Hugh 05-02-2017 12:09
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35884055)
No, they have just refused to unilaterally lift the ban at the request of the administration without a hearing.

You're knowledge of the system is truly breathtaking
Which is understandable in a Brit, but not in the President of the USA, who appears to have forgotten what he was taught in 8th Grade Civics classes about the Constitution, and the Judiciary's role in it...

nomadking 05-02-2017 12:43
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35884075)
Which is understandable in a Brit, but not in the President of the USA, who appears to have forgotten what he was taught in 8th Grade Civics classes about the Constitution, and the Judiciary's role in it...
You mean the bit in the law where he IS allowed to impose a ban?

Damien 05-02-2017 12:55
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35884077)
You mean the bit in the law where he IS allowed to impose a ban?
That's disputed. Hence the court stopping it for now.

papa smurf 05-02-2017 12:59
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35884079)
That's disputed. Hence the court stopping it for now.
so he can't stop people from certain countries entering the USA but he has the codes to nuke those countries wonder what his next step will be ;)

Mick 05-02-2017 13:02
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35884075)
Which is understandable in a Brit, but not in the President of the USA, who appears to have forgotten what he was taught in 8th Grade Civics classes about the Constitution, and the Judiciary's role in it...
Arm chair lawyer talk.

The Acting Solicitor general acting for Trump, argues The Presidents Authority is largely immune to judiciary control when it comes to who can enter the US.

nomadking 05-02-2017 13:06
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35884079)
That's disputed. Hence the court stopping it for now.
Nothing to dispute. The LAW EXPLICITLY says he can impose a ban.

Damien 05-02-2017 13:08
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35884082)
Nothing to dispute. The LAW EXPLICITLY says he can impose a ban.
Well unfortunately the judge doesn't have your knowledge of US law so for now it's been stopped.

nomadking 05-02-2017 13:25
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35884083)
Well unfortunately the judge doesn't have your knowledge of US law so for now it's been stopped.
Quote:
In his order, Mr Trump quotes a 1952 immigration law that gives the president the ability to suspend entry "of all aliens or any class of aliens" into the US when he deems it "detrimental to the interests of the United States."
So that applies to GROUPS, whereas the nonsense for the appeals only applies to INDIVIDUALS.
Quote:
A 1965 revision of the law, however, says individuals cannot be "discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa" because of their "race, sex, nationality, place of birth or place of residence".
So he CAN ban people from certain countries, but he CAN'T ban an INDIVIDUAL on those listed criteria.

ANY ban of whatever sort is inevitably going to impact one group more another. Either the 1952 law exists or it doesn't. Otherwise on what basis could there ever be for the 1952 law? The 1952 LAW DOES EXIST therefore he is allowed to impose a ban.

Even the European Convention on Human Rights would allow a ban. That is supposedly held up a beacon of "Rights". It is classed as an administrative issue and NOT subject to the "right to a fair hearing".

1andrew1 05-02-2017 14:12
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35884075)
Which is understandable in a Brit, but not in the President of the USA, who appears to have forgotten what he was taught in 8th Grade Civics classes about the Constitution, and the Judiciary's role in it...
lol :D

martyh 05-02-2017 14:33
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35884054)
Huh. I always thought there were many courts and appeals before they got to the Supreme Court.
Don't know but according to this after the decision is made on 21st feb then Trump can ask the supreme court for a ruling

Quote:
Justice Department lawyers were preparing to immediately ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit to dissolve Robart’s order, but had not filed anything as of Saturday evening. It will go to a panel of judges who consider such emergency requests, and that decision could be crucial.

While the losing side can then request intervention from the Supreme Court, it would take the votes of five justices to overturn the panel decision. The court has been shorthanded since the death of Justice Antonin Scalia nearly a year ago, and ideologically divided between four liberal and four conservative members.

The issue could reach the high court in days — or weeks
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.8062f4f76ec3

---------- Post added at 14:33 ---------- Previous post was at 14:23 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35884085)
So he CAN ban people from certain countries, but he CAN'T ban an INDIVIDUAL on those listed criteria.
He can't ban someone based on religion which is what he is trying to do ,many top US lawyers are saying he's violating the 1st amendment

Maggy 05-02-2017 15:41
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38872680

nomadking 05-02-2017 15:48
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35884093)



He can't ban someone based on religion which is what he is trying to do ,many top US lawyers are saying he's violating the 1st amendment
The LAW says he can impose a ban. As the LAW says he CAN, is it possible for anybody to come up with a hypothetical example where everybody could agree it does apply? As other than a complete worldwide, no example exists, then the original LAW stands as it HASN'T been reversed. The Executive Order OVERRIDES any other consideration, which is aimed at non-Executive Order decisions and at INDIVIDUALS, not groups.

Hugh 05-02-2017 16:34
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
But the Executive Order has to conform to the laws of the land and the Constitution, and not over-ride those - this is the basis on which the Federal Judge over-ruled it, and why it must be considered in the Courts.

Even the President has to follow the Law and the Constitution.

nomadking 05-02-2017 16:43
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35884118)
But the Executive Order has to conform to the laws of the land and the Constitution, and not over-ride those - this is the basis on which the Federal Judge over-ruled it, and why it must be considered in the Courts.

Even the President has to follow the Law and the Constitution.
So where is the hypothetical example that would be valid. There must be be one for the grounds against the Executive Order to be remotely valid. Any basis will always affect one group than another.

If anything it is those that are opposed to the EO that are acting illegally as they keep trying to discriminate by overturning the general rule with discriminatory exceptions to the rule. It is exceptions to a general rule that are discriminatory. The general rule by definition isn't, as it is applied generally.

Hugh 05-02-2017 16:46
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Well, the Vice-President of the USA disagrees with you...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...vows-overturn/
Quote:
Mike Pence has said Judge James Robart, referred to by Donald Trump as a "so-called judge", has the authority to take the actions he did.

“He certainly does, and that's why the administration is complying with that order as we speak," he told ABC.

Pierre 05-02-2017 19:41
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35884093)
He can't ban someone based on religion which is what he is trying to do ,many top US lawyers are saying he's violating the 1st amendment
F.F.S......this is why people get annoyed. When on this very thread it has been explained in crystal clarity for the hard of understanding that this is not lawfully or legally a ban on any religion but it is a ban on nationals of those countries regardless of anything.

And yet you still get statements like this from you Marty, which after all this time and all the evidence and facts displayed in just this thread and still you come out with this........quite simply make you look like a simpleton.

ianch99 05-02-2017 19:56
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35884028)
But I'm not incorrect.

Not end of discussion. Because you are wrong. It is States which determines the Presidency, not the entire voting population. Trump won more States, so Kursk is right based on how the democracy system works in the US.
We are not saying that Trump did not win the electoral college, he did. What we are saying and you keep conflating the two points here, is that he did not get a majority of the votes cast. More people voted for Clinton than Trump .. period.

If people go around saying that " .. his supporters are the majority of the electorate" then they are wrong. This is such a basic point, I am surprised it needs any debate.

If you go around saying that Trump has a popular mandate then this gives a very misleading impression of his support in the country.

1andrew1 05-02-2017 20:54
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35884141)
F.F.S......this is why people get annoyed. When on this very thread it has been explained in crystal clarity for the hard of understanding that this is not lawfully or legally a ban on any religion but it is a ban on nationals of those countries regardless of anything.

And yet you still get statements like this from you Marty, which after all this time and all the evidence and facts displayed in just this thread and still you come out with this........quite simply make you look like a simpleton.
Hopefully, we can all agree that the order does not mention Muslims or Christians by name?
The argument being made is that Muslims have been singled out implicitly, not explicitly.

Thus the order can be seen as a violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution; "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".
As evidence of discriminatory intent, Trump's challengers cite:
* The exemption that the immigration order provides for religious minorities.
* Comments made by him and his colleagues whilst campaigning.

They additionally argue that the action violates the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment guarantees of "due process of the law" by denying entry to individuals with valid visas.

Chris 05-02-2017 20:56
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35884141)
F.F.S......this is why people get annoyed. When on this very thread it has been explained in crystal clarity for the hard of understanding that this is not lawfully or legally a ban on any religion but it is a ban on nationals of those countries regardless of anything.

And yet you still get statements like this from you Marty, which after all this time and all the evidence and facts displayed in just this thread and still you come out with this........quite simply make you look like a simpleton.
It stems from Trump's own campaign press release, read out at a rally by him, which said he was calling for a ban on travel from Muslim countries until US officials could figure out "what the hell is going on".

The wording of his executive orders might have been more circumspect, but the thinking behind them is there for all to see.

pip08456 05-02-2017 20:58
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35884142)
We are not saying that Trump did not win the electoral college, he did. What we are saying and you keep conflating the two points here, is that he did not get a majority of the votes cast. More people voted for Clinton than Trump .. period.

If people go around saying that " .. his supporters are the majority of the electorate" then they are wrong. This is such a basic point, I am surprised it needs any debate.

If you go around saying that Trump has a popular mandate then this gives a very misleading impression of his support in the country.
It's worth noting that if you take California out of the result, Trump would've won the popular vote. Funny how one state can change an election result, I wonder.

Could that be why they have the College votes?

Pierre 05-02-2017 21:12
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35884144)
Hopefully, we can all agree that the order does not mention Muslims or Christians by name?
The argument being made is that Muslims have been singled out implicitly, not explicitly.

Thus the order can be seen as a violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution; "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".
As evidence of discriminatory intent, Trump's challengers cite:
* The exemption that the immigration order provides for religious minorities.
* Comments made by him and his colleagues whilst campaigning.

They additionally argue that the action violates the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment guarantees of "due process of the law" by denying entry to individuals with valid visas.
I understand all of that but it was quite clear that such a ban, based on religion, was unconstitutional and unlawful, therefore the order that was made avoided or evaded such.

So it doesn't matter what was said in the campaign or what people perceive implicitly.

He has tried to apply his policy the best he can, within the the law, and still this ****, acknowledging the initial issues around green cards and stuff.

TheDaddy 05-02-2017 21:32
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35884141)
F.F.S......this is why people get annoyed. When on this very thread it has been explained in crystal clarity for the hard of understanding that this is not lawfully or legally a ban on any religion but it is a ban on nationals of those countries regardless of anything.

And yet you still get statements like this from you Marty, which after all this time and all the evidence and facts displayed in just this thread and still you come out with this........quite simply make you look like a simpleton.
I think some people just get annoyed because someone disagrees with them :)

And didn't the donald say he was going to prioritise Christian syrian refugees over muslim ones, that maybe to right some perverse previous imbalance but when in the previous pre president breath he's talking about a total and complete shutdown of the borders to muslims it's not going to be hard to see a bias

---------- Post added at 21:32 ---------- Previous post was at 21:31 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 35884058)
I really can't stand Trump.

Been reading his tweets from the last few days and he really does behave like a stroppy teenager when things don't go his way. I also can't believe that as POTUS he is still allowed to send his own tweets without advice first, as some of the tweets are very dodgy.

Sooner they get something they can impeach him on the better I say.
I like him, he's hilarious plus could you imagine how dull it'd be if killer clinton had won, all we'd have to chat about would be brexit :sleep: and at least whilst he's playing with his tweeting machine his hands aren't wandering near any other more important buttons or any ladies lady bits

1andrew1 05-02-2017 21:36
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35884147)
I understand all of that but it was quite clear that such a ban, based on religion, was unconstitutional and unlawful, therefore the order that was made avoided or evaded such.

So it doesn't matter what was said in the campaign or what people perceive implicitly.

He has tried to apply his policy the best he can, within the the law, and still this ****, acknowledging the initial issues around green cards and stuff.
You might not conclude that it matters. But as we know, it's not up to us web discussants in the UK but to the judges in the US to decide if these things matter.

ianch99 05-02-2017 21:49
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35884146)
It's worth noting that if you take California out of the result, Trump would've won the popular vote. Funny how one state can change an election result, I wonder.

Could that be why they have the College votes?
I agree. However, the voters in California count the same as those in the Mid-West. It is the notion of a popular mandate that must not be mis-used.

In the UK, even with its flawed parliamentary system, a new Government with a slim majority is always very aware of this and would (or should) refrain from declaring a strong mandate from the electorate for new, controversial policies.

1andrew1 05-02-2017 22:33
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35884146)
It's worth noting that if you take California out of the result, Trump would've won the popular vote. Funny how one state can change an election result, I wonder.

Could that be why they have the College votes?
It's also worth noting that California is the largest state. Its population of over 38m is about 1.5 times the size of the next largest state, Texas.

Arthurgray50@blu 05-02-2017 22:33
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Just to point out, IF, the whole country went for the popular vote. Clinton would have won comfortably. She had more that 300.00 votes than Trump did.

What we have here is that Trump, is NOT above the Law. He has to within the Constitution. He is now criticising the Judge - see he wants it HIS way.

He is running a Country, not one of his Business.

I bet if that Judge was an Employee of his empire. He would be sacked today. As he wants everything HIS way.

Maggy 05-02-2017 23:14
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35884151)
I think some people just get annoyed because someone disagrees with them :)

And didn't the donald say he was going to prioritise Christian syrian refugees over muslim ones, that maybe to right some perverse previous imbalance but when in the previous pre president breath he's talking about a total and complete shutdown of the borders to muslims it's not going to be hard to see a bias

---------- Post added at 21:32 ---------- Previous post was at 21:31 ----------



I like him, he's hilarious plus could you imagine how dull it'd be if killer clinton had won, all we'd have to chat about would be brexit :sleep: and at least whilst he's playing with his tweeting machine his hands aren't wandering near any other more important buttons or any ladies lady bits
I don't care to live in interesting times thanks..

adzii_nufc 05-02-2017 23:40
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 35884162)
Just to point out, IF, the whole country went for the popular vote. Clinton would have won comfortably. She had more that 300.00 votes than Trump did.

What we have here is that Trump, is NOT above the Law. He has to within the Constitution. He is now criticising the Judge - see he wants it HIS way.

He is running a Country, not one of his Business.

I bet if that Judge was an Employee of his empire. He would be sacked today. As he wants everything HIS way.
Do you ever not repeat the same thing over and over and over and over and ov..:zzz:

It's a country not a business, I think we got it the first six times.

martyh 06-02-2017 06:53
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35884141)
F.F.S......this is why people get annoyed. When on this very thread it has been explained in crystal clarity for the hard of understanding that this is not lawfully or legally a ban on any religion but it is a ban on nationals of those countries regardless of anything.

And yet you still get statements like this from you Marty, which after all this time and all the evidence and facts displayed in just this thread and still you come out with this........quite simply make you look like a simpleton.
I don't care what you said on this thread ,you are not a US lawyer and the US judiciary have decided that Trumps ban is not lawful or legal because in part it discriminates against a certain religion by favouring another .This is the second time i have explained this to you ,many other people have explained this to you and yet you still seem unable to grasp it instead you throw insults about .You should either stop having childish temper tantrums because people disagree with you or back out of the thread until you can act like an adult and post without insults.

Pierre 06-02-2017 07:19
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35884185)
I don't care what you said on this thread ,you are not a US lawyer and the US judiciary have decided that Trumps ban is not lawful or legal because in part it discriminates against a certain religion by favouring another .
Once again you are the one that does not, or refuses to, understand the situation.

The US judiciary have not yet decided that ban is lawful or not lawful. They have suspended the ban pending a full hearing which either today or next Monday, I'm not sure.

The administration have been asked to present more evidence.

After the hearing, they'll make a ruling and then we'll know. No doubt if it is still blocked it will carry on ascending up the legal ladder.


Quote:
This is the second time i have explained this to you
You can explain nothing to me. As that would need a level of knowledge on your part

Mr Banana 06-02-2017 07:30
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Just noticed he has had another go at the judge, tweeting that if anything happens blame him and the court system?

Appreciate that there are members who have a different opinion on Trump so am interested in what posters would think if Theresa May tweeted stuff like this?

1andrew1 06-02-2017 09:46
Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Banana (Post 35884189)
Just noticed he has had another go at the judge, tweeting that if anything happens blame him and the court system?

Appreciate that there are members who have a different opinion on Trump so am interested in what posters would think if Theresa May tweeted stuff like this?
I guess in the UK, our politicians' equivalent of tweeting is off-the-record briefings.
Tweetings from Donald Trump's account or the POTUS accounts are in a way better as they are attributable and cannot be blamed on the messenger if they don't go down well. So I would prefer it if UK Prime Ministers tweeted instead of using off-the-record briefings.

Cable Forum 06-02-2017 11:47
Re: U.S Election 2016
 
This thread is now closed as a new one has started:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/sh...php?t=33704412


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:58.
Page 22 of 22 « First 1218192021 22
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.