Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
The cowards are deciding to do everything today, whilst the media turns its focus to the hurricane.
First the transgender ban, Arpaio pardon and now Gorka "resigning".
First the transgender ban, Arpaio pardon and now Gorka "resigning".
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Don't see much wrong with his complaints to be honest.
Such cowards
Friday...Massive hurricane about to hit and this is what that WH was busy with.
Friday...Massive hurricane about to hit and this is what that WH was busy with.
People will hopefully make a huge fuss over this pardon and take to the streets.
We should not be fooled by this controversial pardon, as it is just a test run to see how big the backlash is and to gear up to pardon himself and his associates.
We should not be fooled by this controversial pardon, as it is just a test run to see how big the backlash is and to gear up to pardon himself and his associates.
Last edited:
Except unlike most rational people, he likely feels the Trump administration is in poor shape because its not right wing enough for him.
Trump has pretty much said all those who voted for him, his "base" are Neo-Nazis and racists by the pardon.
They are the only ones would agree with this.
We have stopped being a country of laws by his action.
Lets see what Ryan and McConnel say. (i'm sure it will be nothing).
They are the only ones would agree with this.
We have stopped being a country of laws by his action.
Lets see what Ryan and McConnel say. (i'm sure it will be nothing).
I mean his specific complaints regarding Afghanistan.
I'm in Phoenix and this is actually a bigger story in the context of Trump and his Presidency than it is in the local context.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Gorkas gone apparently
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Apparently he was sacked.
Of course! Why would anybody like him leave that sweet honeypot!
Everyone always leaves on a Friday...
Was this a news feed hijack by Trump, or is this clown so thick he felt a massive storm hitting a coastline would make this a quiet news dump?
He also makes his WH press secretary look like the clown she is by doing the pardon, meanwhile sending a message to anyone and everyone under investigation by Mueller that he can pardon them as well.
Rep Paul Gosar (R) on CNN applauding this pardon, but he's a hardcore Trump fanatic.
He also makes his WH press secretary look like the clown she is by doing the pardon, meanwhile sending a message to anyone and everyone under investigation by Mueller that he can pardon them as well.
Rep Paul Gosar (R) on CNN applauding this pardon, but he's a hardcore Trump fanatic.
Feckin hell, this Arpaio craic... 
He is famous because of his racist stops, which he refused to end after a court order.
What is morally far far worse is the self-described concentration camp he ran, which till last week was still standing.
He deserves a painful death, but we live in a world of no justice.
Edit: I don't mean capital punishment, but a death alone in jail from some degenerative disease would fit the bill.
Bastards like Arpaio will probably be lucky and fade away with dementia; still oblivious to his crimes or his cnutiness right till the end.
The army has already told him it is gonna ignore it.
No, it's not. The Pentagon can't just 'ignore' a directive from the President/administration.
What they did was until this formal letter was signed with clear directives, they maintained the status quo. But, now that there is clarity and definition to the order - they'll do as they are told.
Ok, got it
Hold up a minute, I woke up this morning and had to find a video of this because I couldn't believe he'd say something so glib. Sure enough, he did.
He's hopelessly inept.
And of course, Twitter has the perfect riposte from..... the man himself
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
He's hopelessly inept.
And of course, Twitter has the perfect riposte from..... the man himself
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Oh murica. What sort of monster you voted?
The orange sort.
Arpaio is a vile cnut.
He lacks empathy for anyone other than himself.
Even if he's impeached the damage has been done. The divide stake has been driven deep
Trump under the gun as Dreamers deadline looms
The president must decide whether to side with his conservative base or young undocumented immigrants.
By SEUNG MIN KIM
Wendolynn Perez, 23, second from left, a DACA recipient who is now a permanent resident and is originally from Peru, chants with other supporters of immigration reform outside the White House. | Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo
President Donald Trump has been unusually cautious about his plans for so-called Dreamers, but he’s running out of time to make up his mind.
Ten conservative states have threatened to sue the administration in order to kill off the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, a 2012 initiative that has granted work permits to nearly 800,000 young undocumented immigrants. They’re trying to replicate their legal tactic from more than two years ago, when a broader coalition of GOP-led states successfully stopped a more expansive program for millions of undocumented immigrants before it even began.
That means DACA, which President Barack Obama began five years ago this month, is confronting its gravest danger yet. And one of the biggest questions — will Trump defend the program in court — is still anybody’s guess.
Trump is facing pressure from his conservative allies to kill the initiative, but the hard-liner-in-chief has said that he wants to approach Dreamers “with heart.” Meanwhile, it’s also not clear how Trump would fare in court if he does defend the program, even as an early September deadline to act looms.
Legal experts believe if Texas and the nine other states do file a lawsuit to halt DACA, they’ll win — particularly if the same federal judge that blocked the broader immigration program under Obama, Judge Andrew Hanen, oversees the latest legal challenge.
Stephen Legomsky, who was chief counsel at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services when the Obama administration launched DACA, said Hanen’s “extreme, extreme hostility” to Obama’s 2014 executive actions on immigration “was a matter of public record.”
“If Judge Hanen allows them to tack on a DACA challenge, no doubt he will enjoin DACA,” said Legomsky, now a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis. “It is more difficult to disrupt an ongoing successful program. … All that said, given the judges they’re likely to have, I think they have a very tough challenge.”
Email
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Other experts said Hanen’s rulings, as well as decisions from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in the previous immigration case provide the legal underpinnings for DACA to get blocked by the courts.
“This isn’t difficult on the merits. Hanen already said DACA is unlawful,” said Josh Blackman, a libertarian-leaning professor at South Texas College of Law Houston. “If they sue on the merits, they should win in district court.”
The sudden legal threat, which the states — Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Nebraska, South Carolina, Tennessee, Arkansas, Idaho, West Virginia and Kansas — outlined in a June 29 letter, have left lawmakers and immigration advocates scrambling to shield the program for Dreamers.
The initial lawsuit that had challenged the 2014 executive actions is still pending before Hanen. Texas and the other states say if the Trump administration doesn’t begin phasing out DACA by Sept. 5 by not renewing permits nor granting new ones, they’ll sue to stop it by amending the existing lawsuit.
In an order issued last Thursday, Hanen put the case on hold until the states’ self-imposed deadline.
But unclear throughout all this is how the president, who has continued the program despite his campaign pledge to end it, would respond to a legal challenge to DACA.
Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley declined to comment on whether DOJ — under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who fiercely opposed the program as a senator — would defend DACA in court should the states sue.
Gillian Christensen, the acting spokeswoman for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, also declined to comment on potential pending litigation. But she emphasized that the administration “would quickly and professionally make changes to the program in the least impactful manner possible for recipients” should changes to DACA come from Capitol Hill or the courts.
“The Department of Homeland Security's stance remains the same — the future of the DACA program continues to be under review with the administration,” Christensen said. “The president has remarked on the need to handle DACA with compassion and with heart.”
Both Legomsky and Blackman said DOJ could decline to defend itself if it is sued over DACA and leave it to outside intervenors instead to fight the GOP-controlled states. One option is for an attorney general from a pro-DACA state, such as California, to intervene in the case and defend the program in court.
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund is one group that has already intervened in the existing case. In an interview, Thomas Saenz, MALDEF’s president and general counsel, said he believed the states would lose in their bid to kill DACA in the courts.
One reason: Texas and the other states may not even be able to prove that they have standing to sue. In the initial lawsuit, the courts found that the states could go ahead with the lawsuit because of the expenses incurred with issuing new drivers’ licenses to millions of immigrants protected under Obama’s initiative.
But that is much more difficult to prove with DACA, which has been around for five years, Saenz said.
“They will have a hard time proving there is a net cost to DACA,” he said. “They benefit from work-authorized DACA recipients paying taxes, contributing to the economy in a way they could not without work authorization. All of that would have to be vetted and decided before you get to the merits.”
Saenz added: “If they don’t have standing, you don’t ever get to the merits. Case is done.”
He also emphasized that while more than two dozen states challenged the broader Obama executive actions three years ago, just 10 states have vowed to do so on DACA — illustrating the political difficulty of going after Dreamers, usually the most sympathetic group of undocumented immigrants.
A judge could also question why Texas and the states waited so long to mount a legal case against DACA, Saenz added.
On Capitol Hill, some key Republicans aren’t eager for DACA beneficiaries to lose their protections through the courts.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has drafted two bills with Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) protecting DACA recipients and a broader population of young undocumented immigrants brought here illegally.
And pressed twice on whether he believes his home state should go ahead and sue the administration over DACA, Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) signaled that he wasn’t on board with the strategy.
“I just think my objection to the way DACA was handled during the Obama administration was that it should not have been done unilaterally by the president,” Cornyn said in an interview earlier this month. “Congress needs to address this, and I’m eager to do that. That’s how I think it should be resolved.”
Democrats and advocates, meanwhile, are drafting potential legislative remedies, urging the administration to protect the program and making the public relations case on behalf of the Dreamers.
All but six Senate Democrats from the 48-member caucus signed onto a letter to Trump earlier this month asking the president to use his “executive authority to the greatest extent possible” to shield DACA.
In July, Durbin, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) met privately with more than a dozen advocates in the Capitol to plot strategy in advance of the September deadline imposed by the conservative states, according to two people familiar with the meeting.
“I’ve talked to the White House about it, I’ve talked to my colleagues about it,” Durbin said recently. “Lindsey and I have repeated it over and over, we think this is a serious threat.”
The No. 2 Senate Democrat, a longtime advocate for Dreamers, added: “I will say the president has been more forthcoming on DACA and Dreamers than on any other immigration issue. But we still don’t have a plan that deals with it or anything that I think will be timely. And we’re running out of time.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho...people born in Idaho don't wanna live there ffs
The president must decide whether to side with his conservative base or young undocumented immigrants.
By SEUNG MIN KIM
Wendolynn Perez, 23, second from left, a DACA recipient who is now a permanent resident and is originally from Peru, chants with other supporters of immigration reform outside the White House. | Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo
President Donald Trump has been unusually cautious about his plans for so-called Dreamers, but he’s running out of time to make up his mind.
Ten conservative states have threatened to sue the administration in order to kill off the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, a 2012 initiative that has granted work permits to nearly 800,000 young undocumented immigrants. They’re trying to replicate their legal tactic from more than two years ago, when a broader coalition of GOP-led states successfully stopped a more expansive program for millions of undocumented immigrants before it even began.
That means DACA, which President Barack Obama began five years ago this month, is confronting its gravest danger yet. And one of the biggest questions — will Trump defend the program in court — is still anybody’s guess.
Trump is facing pressure from his conservative allies to kill the initiative, but the hard-liner-in-chief has said that he wants to approach Dreamers “with heart.” Meanwhile, it’s also not clear how Trump would fare in court if he does defend the program, even as an early September deadline to act looms.
Legal experts believe if Texas and the nine other states do file a lawsuit to halt DACA, they’ll win — particularly if the same federal judge that blocked the broader immigration program under Obama, Judge Andrew Hanen, oversees the latest legal challenge.
Stephen Legomsky, who was chief counsel at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services when the Obama administration launched DACA, said Hanen’s “extreme, extreme hostility” to Obama’s 2014 executive actions on immigration “was a matter of public record.”
“If Judge Hanen allows them to tack on a DACA challenge, no doubt he will enjoin DACA,” said Legomsky, now a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis. “It is more difficult to disrupt an ongoing successful program. … All that said, given the judges they’re likely to have, I think they have a very tough challenge.”
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Other experts said Hanen’s rulings, as well as decisions from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in the previous immigration case provide the legal underpinnings for DACA to get blocked by the courts.
“This isn’t difficult on the merits. Hanen already said DACA is unlawful,” said Josh Blackman, a libertarian-leaning professor at South Texas College of Law Houston. “If they sue on the merits, they should win in district court.”
The sudden legal threat, which the states — Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Nebraska, South Carolina, Tennessee, Arkansas, Idaho, West Virginia and Kansas — outlined in a June 29 letter, have left lawmakers and immigration advocates scrambling to shield the program for Dreamers.
The initial lawsuit that had challenged the 2014 executive actions is still pending before Hanen. Texas and the other states say if the Trump administration doesn’t begin phasing out DACA by Sept. 5 by not renewing permits nor granting new ones, they’ll sue to stop it by amending the existing lawsuit.
In an order issued last Thursday, Hanen put the case on hold until the states’ self-imposed deadline.
But unclear throughout all this is how the president, who has continued the program despite his campaign pledge to end it, would respond to a legal challenge to DACA.
Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley declined to comment on whether DOJ — under Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who fiercely opposed the program as a senator — would defend DACA in court should the states sue.
Gillian Christensen, the acting spokeswoman for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, also declined to comment on potential pending litigation. But she emphasized that the administration “would quickly and professionally make changes to the program in the least impactful manner possible for recipients” should changes to DACA come from Capitol Hill or the courts.
“The Department of Homeland Security's stance remains the same — the future of the DACA program continues to be under review with the administration,” Christensen said. “The president has remarked on the need to handle DACA with compassion and with heart.”
Both Legomsky and Blackman said DOJ could decline to defend itself if it is sued over DACA and leave it to outside intervenors instead to fight the GOP-controlled states. One option is for an attorney general from a pro-DACA state, such as California, to intervene in the case and defend the program in court.
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund is one group that has already intervened in the existing case. In an interview, Thomas Saenz, MALDEF’s president and general counsel, said he believed the states would lose in their bid to kill DACA in the courts.
One reason: Texas and the other states may not even be able to prove that they have standing to sue. In the initial lawsuit, the courts found that the states could go ahead with the lawsuit because of the expenses incurred with issuing new drivers’ licenses to millions of immigrants protected under Obama’s initiative.
But that is much more difficult to prove with DACA, which has been around for five years, Saenz said.
“They will have a hard time proving there is a net cost to DACA,” he said. “They benefit from work-authorized DACA recipients paying taxes, contributing to the economy in a way they could not without work authorization. All of that would have to be vetted and decided before you get to the merits.”
Saenz added: “If they don’t have standing, you don’t ever get to the merits. Case is done.”
He also emphasized that while more than two dozen states challenged the broader Obama executive actions three years ago, just 10 states have vowed to do so on DACA — illustrating the political difficulty of going after Dreamers, usually the most sympathetic group of undocumented immigrants.
A judge could also question why Texas and the states waited so long to mount a legal case against DACA, Saenz added.
On Capitol Hill, some key Republicans aren’t eager for DACA beneficiaries to lose their protections through the courts.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has drafted two bills with Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) protecting DACA recipients and a broader population of young undocumented immigrants brought here illegally.
And pressed twice on whether he believes his home state should go ahead and sue the administration over DACA, Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) signaled that he wasn’t on board with the strategy.
“I just think my objection to the way DACA was handled during the Obama administration was that it should not have been done unilaterally by the president,” Cornyn said in an interview earlier this month. “Congress needs to address this, and I’m eager to do that. That’s how I think it should be resolved.”
Democrats and advocates, meanwhile, are drafting potential legislative remedies, urging the administration to protect the program and making the public relations case on behalf of the Dreamers.
All but six Senate Democrats from the 48-member caucus signed onto a letter to Trump earlier this month asking the president to use his “executive authority to the greatest extent possible” to shield DACA.
In July, Durbin, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) met privately with more than a dozen advocates in the Capitol to plot strategy in advance of the September deadline imposed by the conservative states, according to two people familiar with the meeting.
“I’ve talked to the White House about it, I’ve talked to my colleagues about it,” Durbin said recently. “Lindsey and I have repeated it over and over, we think this is a serious threat.”
The No. 2 Senate Democrat, a longtime advocate for Dreamers, added: “I will say the president has been more forthcoming on DACA and Dreamers than on any other immigration issue. But we still don’t have a plan that deals with it or anything that I think will be timely. And we’re running out of time.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ten states threatening to sue - states (Texas is the obvious exception) I'm sure you will agree are real hotbeds for Mexicans (legal or otherwise)
Idaho...people born in Idaho don't wanna live there ffs
For someone that relies on his last name for a livelihood, making Trump toxic for his kids and future generations would be sweet enough revenge.
Thats already happened.
Not soon enough. We should find out where Fred Trump was buried and then pee on his grave for contributing to such a cnut of a son.
Btw... there's a Confederate monument protest going down in the downtown area of the city I used to live in / the city 25 minutes from me.
Guys dressed like they're Tier 1 Special Forces Operators walking around in 85* weather
Guys dressed like they're Tier 1 Special Forces Operators walking around in 85* weather
This gonna get ugly. Those marines wannabe are nutters. God forbid one of them drew them first shot it could spark a very violent and bloody riots
He is destined to have a biography named, A Cockwomble Orange.
Very true.
Dislike every time Tariq Nasheed has a decent tweet that gets posted in here. Detestable person. Some of his thoughts are decent though.
- Status