Trump says to blame the judges and court system if a terrorist attack happens

[gixxer0.6g]

Liberals have handed Trump another Win.

When another terrorist attack happens :

- Trump will blame the liberals for hampering his efforts to protect ourselves (the ban, etc)

- The country will agree with Trump

- Trump will have renewed political capital to run roughshod with new policies

And now we wait.

Pretty much going as planned. Before, if a terrorist attack happened the left would be on all the streets saying I told you so. Now, the roles are reversed.

[Lastro]

more genius from trump. easy scapegoat right there.

And? Did obama write an executive order baring those countries?

...
you're basically asking if obama committed political suicide

[RyanAintLying]

Why would the fact that liberals have double standards and no backbone trigger me? You can do absolutely nothing about it other than cry and whine like you already do. It's rather hilarious and one of the minor reasons people voted for Trump to see the mass meltdown happening. It doesn't trigger me in the slightest that you admit that the EO would be fine, but not when Trump and Bannon introduces it. Just shows how stupid and weak your narrative is.

Your fragile emotional state is interfering with your reading comprehension.

Since reading clearly isn't your strong point I'm going to provide some assistance for you, because I'm a nice guy like that. What does the bold and underline part of this post mean?

None of the previous administrations had Steve Bannon and Trump, though. Maybe if the executive order was properly written and went through the proper channels it wouldn't have been struck down.

But that's not what happened, is it?

Once you've successfully answered that question, I want you to then explain how you arrived at the conclusion that I said the EO was fine but struck down simply because Bannon and Trump wrote it.

I have faith in you! Good luck

[zinkhan99]

Your fragile emotional state is interfering with your reading comprehension.

Since reading clearly isn't your strong point I'm going to provide some assistance for you, because I'm a nice guy like that. What does the bold and underline part of this post mean?



Once you've successfully answered that question, I want you to then explain how you arrived at the conclusion that I said the EO was fine but struck down simply because Bannon and Trump wrote it.

I have faith in you! Good luck

Glad we can at least agree on the rest of my post. Good luck !

[RyanAintLying]

Glad we can at least agree on the rest of my post. Good luck !

The only thing we agree on is that you just got BTFO and can't even come up with a reply. Sad.

[jlick]

ITT: Liberals don't think that a majority of the terrorists in the world follow the teachings of Mohmmahed. Sad!

[zinkhan99]

The only thing we agree on is that you just got BTFO and can't even come up with a reply. Sad.

Keep coping while Trump Makes America Great Again.

[YesWayNoWeigh]

Liberals have handed Trump another Win.

When another terrorist attack happens :

- Trump will blame the liberals for hampering his efforts to protect ourselves (the ban, etc)

- The country will agree with Trump

- Trump will have renewed political capital to run roughshod with new policies

and when the attacker is from saudi arabia? lol then what

[CaliSuperSport]

Dictator check list
1.. cult of personality... check
2.. convince everybody the media is lying , suckle at my direct teat for the truth (twitter) ... check
3.. destroy confidence in the judiciary... check

Call me crazy, but I don't think utilizing a provision of the U.S. Constitution is dictatorial. Nor is calling out judges for making political rather than objective rulings.

[holtmcg]

and when the attacker is from saudi arabia? lol then what

They'll blame Obama (serious).

[dan987]

All foreigners are vetted. Foreigners from those particular countries go through an extremely lengthly vetting process conducted over several months before they are admitted. They are finger printed, photographed, their background and purpose is investigated.

That's the current system. No one from those countries has ever committed a terrorist act on US soil. Not one.

Ever.

The judge simply noted there was no evidence or suggestion of evidence this ban would protect the United States in any fashion.

The whole point of this is that they wanted to set up their own vetting process because they didn't believe in the current one.

Also, just because an attack didn't happen from these ISIS infested countries yet doesn't mean anything

[seven11]

Liberals have handed Trump another Win.

When another terrorist attack happens :

- Trump will blame the liberals for hampering his efforts to protect ourselves (the ban, etc)

- The country will agree with Trump

- Trump will have renewed political capital to run roughshod with new policies

Well, I guess it would be only reasonable to blame Trump if any of his policies back fire.

- Mentally ill with a gun
- Banks taking advantage of people
- economy crashes due to less regulations
- Any environmental issue after EPA is abolished.

[HELIX35]

Liberals have handed Trump another Win.

When another terrorist attack happens :

- Trump will blame the liberals for hampering his efforts to protect ourselves (the ban, etc)

- The country will agree with Trump

- Trump will have renewed political capital to run roughshod with new policies

Yep, that is exactly how facists consolidate power

[RyanAintLying]

Call me crazy, but I don't think utilizing a provision of the U.S. Constitution is dictatorial. Nor is calling out judges for making political rather than objective rulings .

I'm not buying this at all.

If Obama tried to issue an executive order that put restrictions on owning guns but got shut down by a judge, then ran to twitter to insult the judge and say "next time a mass shooter kills people with guns blame this so called judge!!!" it would turn into madness.

Republicans would be in the street with pitchforks calling Obama a dictator and demanding he get impeached.

Heck, Obama got called a dictator for issuing executive orders that were lawful.

[jlick]

I'm not buying this at all.

If Obama tried to issue an executive order that put restrictions on owning guns but got shut down by a judge, then ran to twitter to insult the judge and say "next time a mass shooter kills people with guns blame this so called judge!!!" it would turn into madness.

Republicans would be in the street with pitchforks calling Obama a dictator and demanding he get impeached.

Heck, Obama got called a dictator for issuing executive orders that were lawful.

Terrible analogy. What law says a President can restrict gun ownership? Fail....just like the libs

[RyanAintLying]

Terrible analogy. What law says a President can restrict gun ownership? Fail....just like the libs

Not sure if serious

[Ten_Hearts]

People in this thread makes it sound like the Reichstag fire is coming....

[dan987]

Not sure if serious

It is serious the executive branch has a lot of power when it comes to immigration. I'm not for the tweet though

[sawoobley]

I'm not buying this at all.

If Obama tried to issue an executive order that put restrictions on owning guns but got shut down by a judge, then ran to twitter to insult the judge and say "next time a mass shooter kills people with guns blame this so called judge!!!" it would turn into madness.

Republicans would be in the street with pitchforks calling Obama a dictator and demanding he get impeached.

Heck, Obama got called a dictator for issuing executive orders that were lawful.

Yes, because #1 Obama would have tried to take away constitutional rights from citizens and #2 such an action would make it more likely for a mass shooter to kill a bunch of people since all the good people would be disarmed. At least Trump was exercising power given to him as president.