world

Trump's immigration order causes chaos at airports, outrage at protests

93 Comments
By DEEPTI HAJELA and MICHAEL TARM

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

93 Comments
Login to comment

It was an amazing rally at the White House, and the signs and the diverse protesters told such an important story about our immigrant nation. This nation was built on the backs of enslaved peoples and immigrants and we can't ban human beings.

11 ( +15 / -4 )

Poor old Trump thinks he's still a CEO and can run the country like one. Luckily the US has systems in place to prevent egotistical nutjobs like him from having absolute control.

16 ( +21 / -5 )

Funny how things can quickly get out of hand when you give the keys to a child and let him drive.

23 ( +28 / -5 )

You want better vetting and security, sure, look I can understand to a point, but to put things into action like this shows the precise lack of experience and ultimately humanity that people have been questioning throughout.

So much for the not much will change, we have had week of knee-jerk policy repealing with little or no thought about how to address the issues they cause is worrying on a scale I can't really fathom.

Repealing of healthcare, women rights, energy policy, imports and economics, changes to immigration all without a clear path to any normality is just scary.

I find it so funny how everyone used to accuse the previous president about he will make this or that crazy change and never really did, yet here is this guy acting like he can do whatever he wants even without the mandate of the people..

And not get me started on "alternative facts"... but even the most ardent supporter of the right must agree there are things we can determine are true or not otherwise we are headed for a new dark ages.

18 ( +21 / -3 )

I am simply ashamed to be an American right now. I am technically also Australian and I've been thinking of telling Japanese people that I'm Aussie just to save myself from constantly explaining how a person like Trump could ever get elected. I'd be wedging a bet, though, that Japanese people can't tell the difference of an American and Australian accent (in Japanese). Worth a try, anyways!

5 ( +13 / -8 )

maybe better vetting and security would be possible if he targeted the actual countries that have attacked the USA, not the 7 who haven't.

I dunno, kind of a basic logic thing

12 ( +15 / -3 )

George Orwell's 1984 is coming to pass

7 ( +9 / -2 )

All on Holocaust remembrance day too.

Wow.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

This was a knee jerk over-reaction by Trump and one of the reasons I could not support him. If his intention is truly to support the security of the United States (which is something I am for) there are probably other ways to go about this.

Also I see this is a 90 day restriction only. I would like him to explain why this is limited to 90 days. Is there something else in the works?

The Obama administration stopped issuing visas to Iraqis in 2011 for 6 months and also had travel restrictions imposed on the identical 7 countries as Trump did but the mechanism to implement was a bit different and it was not as extreme.

While I understand this is not a ban against all Muslims (there are numerous other Muslim countries where a ban will not exist) it will impact many people who are innocent, which is outright wrong.

The Director of the FBI and the Director of Homeland Security under the Obama administration admitted there was no mechanism in place to vet all refugees. If this is the case, instead of a radical ban, why could Trump not indicate the vetting process will be stricter and it may take a little more time for the applications to be processed.

Also, the fact that this is impacting people who already have green cards is outrageous. This was poorly planned and poorly executed and as I stated above, one of the primary reasons I did not support Trump for President.

Whether you agree with Trump or not he is biting off too much in too short of time. Running a country is not anything like running a real estate business. This is going to backfire and really negatively impact Trump's effectiveness as a leader and ruin his chances for the reforms he wants to push through. If you are a supporter of Trump this is bad news...for those against Trump....this is good news...as it all sounds bad in the short term but in the long run I think President Trump is going to destroy his own presidency.

I have felt the U.S. has been getting out of control gradually since 9/11. The ideological pendulum is swinging radically from one side to the other and seems to be accelerating as time goes on. I think the only thing that could save the U.S. (before the whole thing implodes) would be if a TRUE moderate, capable of pragmatic and rational thought and also capable uniting the nation, could be elected. This seems to be highly unlikely in today's environment.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

Also I see this is a 90 day restriction only. I would like him to explain why this is limited to 90 days. Is there something else in the works?

Some refugees have become terrorists like Boston Bombing Brothers. Russia have warned US authority for that brothers were dangerous however US still issue the refugee Visa for that evil brothers.

The consequence is many American lost their legs during Boston race. 90 days is required for analyzing and vetting the screening potential terrorists with reliable immigration system. It may be a bit harsh. However it is safer.

Not all refugees are terrorists However many terrorists have pretended they were refugees before.

-6 ( +10 / -16 )

This move is just foolish, incoherent posturing by Trump. Why aren't our Saudi "allies" also banned from entering the US? They are the ones responsible for 9/11, they are the ones who still teach their children in school that we are infidels who must be killed, yet they are still allowed into the US.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

Funny how things can quickly get out of hand when you give the keys to a child and let him drive.

Makes sense...considering how his hands aren't big enough to manage the steering wheel.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

"This move is just foolish, incoherent posturing by Trump. Why aren't our Saudi "allies" also banned from entering the US? They are the ones responsible for 9/11, they are the ones who still teach their children in school that we are infidels who must be killed, yet they are still allowed into the US."

The best 2 explanations for this I've heard on this site from the Trump supporters are:

1) Obama didn't get tough on Saudi Arabia. Don't have a go at Trump, you biased libs.

2) At least he's doing...erm...something...erm....yeah!

11 ( +12 / -1 )

i don't necessarily agree with trump's policies but gotta admire him for carrying through with his campaign promises unlike most professional politicians.

as for the constitutional crisis, that was created by obama running roughshod over the constitution in the first place. trump is just fully utilizing the precedents put in place by obama and the courts.

as for the ban itself, could have been implemented more smoothly with more planning but looking at the problems with the migrants in europe, i can't say i disagree banning migrants from countries that are clearly hostile to the US.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Not all refugees are terrorists However many terrorists have pretended they were refugees before.

Pretty much zero refugees are terrorists. When have terrorists pretended to be refugees?

3 ( +8 / -5 )

I'm just glad, he's taking a stance on this, in my opinion, he should go further and halt and slow the entry for people coming from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Nigeria as well. Hope he doubles down and once properly vetted, let them enter the country

-16 ( +7 / -23 )

No use if they got and later get radicalised in the USA, most get radicalised via SNS. Mosques forget about it

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Not all refugees are terrorists However many terrorists have pretended they were refugees before.

Conservative backed Cato Institute calculated it out that the odds of a refugee attacking a US citizen in a terror attack was 1 in 3.64 Billion. More domestic terrorists are terrorists than immigrants. Stephen Colbert episode here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C-ryuPII08

USA lives on alternative facts and is careening into a new Dark Age at a rapid pace

7 ( +7 / -0 )

When have terrorists pretended to be refugees?

In Europe ? They enter illegally and get seeded into refugee routes by the dozens.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-europes-migrant-crisis-became-an-opportunity-for-isis/2016/04/21/ec8a7231-062d-4185-bb27-cc7295d35415_story.html

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Is this chaos a sign of things to come? Totally incompetent implementation. Even legal green card holders are/were being detained. Get ready for the USA implosion.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Amateur hour at the White House. By an amazing coincidence, Muslim countries where Trump has business interests, like Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Turkey, did not find themselves on the list. Where did the 911 terrorists come from again? This man really doesn't know what he is doing and is surrounded by yes-men which is all he knows. What a shambles.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Hmmm. But no ban from the countries with terrorists that have killed the most int the US, e.g., Saudi Arabia, UAE, Lebanon and Egypt?

Am I alone is this observation?

7 ( +7 / -0 )

@crazyjoe,

Another general statement. Yes. Immigrants from Europe that worked and built business not ones that mooch and cause problems.

@PeaceWarrior,

Especially when dealing with narrow minded whiners.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

would love to see saudi arabia on that list,,,

4 ( +4 / -0 )

So if Saudi Arabia is such a bad place, why did Obama visit there in 2009 and bow to the King? Oh wait he didnt bow he just stooped down because cause his is tall (alternative facts existed in 2009 too). If Saudi Arabia is such a bad place how was Hillary able to keep the 25 million they donated to the Clinton Foundation?

Saudi Arabia gave the foundation up to $25 million, and Clinton signed offon a controversial $29 billion sale of fighter jets to the country.

http://www.vox.com/2016/8/25/12615340/hillary-clinton-foundation

I agree they should be on the list. But people saying it was Trumps decision that they are not is unfair. The Obama Administration and the State Department put them in the status of an ALLY of the US due to donations and money from weapons sales.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

Amateur hour at the White House. By an amazing coincidence, Muslim countries where Trump has business interests, like Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Turkey, did not find themselves on the list.

Conspiracy theories floating again, can you prove this? If you can't, don't speculate. Personally, there are other countries that I think need to be added to this list, but to insinuate, he's not blocking the Saudis because of Business ties is pure speculative and nothing more.

This man really doesn't know what he is doing and is surrounded by yes-men which is all he knows. What a shambles.

If he didn't he could never have created an empire business worldwide or even make it to the presidency, he did, we didn't, seems pretty smart and methodical to me.

-17 ( +1 / -18 )

if Saudi Arabia is such a bad place, why did Obama visit there in 2009 and bow to the King?

Because that's protocol when you meet a king. Just like you shake hands when you meet a president.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Bass:

can you prove this? If you can't, don't speculate

Not speculation to say that those three countries were not on the list, or that Trump has business interests there. Merely a statement of facts.

he could never have created an empire business worldwide

Born rich.

make it to the presidency

Comey, Putin, Electoral College

seems pretty smart and methodical to me

The man has no brain, and his methods are totally random. But you are entitled to keep thinking what you are thinking on that if the facts don't suit you.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

You bow to the King of a country that should supposedly be on the banned list due to supporting terrorism? Why would a USA president even go meet a person like that? Like I said, arms sales and donations to the Clinton Foundation has put Saudi Arabia in a different category that the 7 countries on the Obama list.

But now all the liberals trying to blame Trump for them not being there? this was decided back in 2008/09 that they are different and Trump just hasnt seen fit to change it yet. When you have a list of things to do, you handle whats already on the list first and then add things if you need to after.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

The US has the responsibility for securing its border, just like every other country. I forget, was it 12 or 15 refugees allowed into Japan last year? Australia locks illegal immigrants up in a concentration camp in some out of the way island. If Germany and Canada want to accept even more refugees, that is their choice. The US does not dictate policy to them, just like non-American do not dictate policy to the US. I have no rights in Japan, the US or Iran, just like non-Americans have no rights or the expectation of rights in the US.

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

You bow to the King of a country that should supposedly be on the banned list due to supporting terrorism?

Yeah, it's called diplomacy. Would you prefer a chest bump?

9 ( +11 / -2 )

@pointofview

Not sure I understand your point of view... Non sequitur do not work well without facial clues.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Well Trump says its going well, so I am sure it is.

Trump also said millions attended his inauguration.....

Welcome to the new world, where alternate facts are the Truth and reality is a delusion.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Might go well in the states, back home we are stuçk with yjousands who can't board a flight that they paid for and are stuck now.

Many can't see their families or can get back to their jobs.

Hail Trump

5 ( +6 / -1 )

why did Obama visit there in 2009 and bow to the King?

Oh, I could guess, but I'll digress......

Because that's protocol when you meet a king.

There protocol, not the US, we don't bow to Kings.

Just like you shake hands when you meet a president.

It's bit more of being submissive, but we don't have to worry about that blemish in our future history books.

Not speculation to say that those three countries were not on the list, or that Trump has business interests there. Merely a statement of facts.

To what level? You don't know or the exact ties and business relationship, again. You are speculating.

Born rich.

I'm from LA and being born rich doesn't guarantee you BMW or a House in Malibu, it doesn't even guarantee you a foot in the best nightclub.

Comey, Putin, Electoral College

Or lame candidate, too far leftist radical polices, people not going out to vote.

The man has no brain, and his methods are totally random.

So was Reagan's often. So that's a bad thing?

But you are entitled to keep thinking what you are thinking

I sure will and extend the same feeling

-18 ( +2 / -20 )

@Alex Hutchins..... I've been thinking of telling Japanese people that I'm Aussie just to save myself from constantly explaining how a person like Trump could ever get elected."

Is it really hard for you to explain to listeners some basic principles of Democracy ? Did you attend primary and middle school then ?

Muslim is American !

Huh ?!

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

There protocol, not the US, we don't bow to Kings.

History proves you wrong.

It's bit more of being submissive

No, it's being diplomatic. Bowing costs nothing, and does not prevent tough negotiating to follow.

I'm from LA and being born rich doesn't guarantee you BMW or a House in Malibu, it doesn't even guarantee you a foot in the best nightclub.

But it guaranteed Trump millions of dollars to get started.

He didn't create an empire, he inherited one.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

This nation was built on the backs of enslaved peoples and immigrants and we can't ban human beings.

So you want open borders? That's insane. The statement that America is a nation of immigrants is a non-sequetor. An tradition of immigration does not imply that there should be an open border for anyone to come whenever they feel like it. Also, America was built "on the backs" of many more non-slaves than slaves. Slavery in America was terrible but don't pretend that no one else contributed to the countries development. That's a lie.

White House adviser Kellyanne Conway described the changes as “a small price to pay” to keep the nation safe.

Very true.

NZ2011: Repealing of healthcare, women rights, energy policy, imports and economics, changes to immigration all without a clear path to any normality is just scary.

What hyperbole! What is scary is that a nation is willing change it's culture with one that does not accept it's values. Repealing women rights? So withholding taxpayer funding for some later day Kermit Gosnell's abortion of babies at nine months gestation is "the repeal of women's rights?" You folks are getting yourselves all worked up and are lashing out incoherently. I can assure you that Islamists are much less interested in women's rights than Trump is.

Why is it that no one can wait 3 months for the US to do a thorough review of the nations immigration/refugee programs? In the meantime won't Europe and Canada gladly accept any and all refugees in America's place? No one will have their human rights denied - just fly to Paris, Berlin, or Edmonton.

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

The statement that America is a nation of immigrants is a non-sequetor

No it's not. A non-sequitur, Latin for 'does not follow', is when an illogical conclusion is made from a premise. Therefore, for a statement to be a non-sequitur, it requires both a premise and a conclusion. "America is a nation of immigrants" has neither a premise, nor makes a conclusion - it simply makes a statement. Now that statement may be incorrect (separate discussion), but the statement itself is not a non-sequitur.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

@yamashi

You need to learn the difference between "how" and "why". We all know how Trump was elected. The question is, why?

Apologies if you're not a native English speaker. I've made that mistake before....

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Is it really hard for you to explain to listeners some basic principles of Democracy ?

Seems to me a basic principle of democracy is that the person with the most votes wins.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

History proves you wrong.

I never said, we didn't, I'm saying we shouldn't.

No, it's being diplomatic.

That's your opinion, my opinion is that it's showing the president to be submissive.

But it guaranteed Trump millions of dollars to get started.

Doesn't mean, you'll succeed, I've seen plenty of that, plenty of it.

He didn't create an empire, he inherited one.

No, he created one, his father was more in Burroughs of NY building apartments and Trump went full commercial. Both completely different paths.

-15 ( +3 / -18 )

I never said, we didn't

Yes you did:

not the US, we don't bow to Kings.

....

Doesn't mean, you'll succeed,

No, but it does give a YUUUUGE head start. And your claim was "he could never have created an empire business worldwide", the point being that he didn't. He was given one.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

@yamashi

Still, you're answering "how".

Why???? is entirely different....

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The new Season of the American Show seems to be interesting, better grab my popcorns and make sure I don't miss a single episode. Keep the drama coming.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

"The majority of Americans wanted to vote for Donald Trump and they did it."

The most inaccurate sentence on this thread.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

The majority of Americans wanted to vote for Donald Trump and they did it.

No they didn't. Not even a majority of voters voted for him. For that matter, not even more voters voted for him.

I see you have bought into the 'alternative facts' game.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Seems to me a basic principle of democracy is that the person with the most votes wins.

Yes, I agree. It seems to me that another basic principle of democracy is that each person's vote carries equal weight. It further seems to me that US abandoning its electoral college would mean that the votes of highly populated areas would carry more weight than those of less populated areas. Why would any presidential candidate ever travel outside the main urban cities? They could basically avoid and ignore the less populated great swathes of the country in favor of the heavily populated areas.

Votes in the United Nations for example do not use the one man, one votes system either. Each country get one vote, no matter how large the population is. One could argue that this does not represent the 'popular vote'. However, representing the popular vote in the UN would mean less populated countries would get fewer chances to influence anything.

I don't know what the solution is, but it does seem to me that the question is more complicated than a one citizen one vote action would fix. I do know that merely the fact that the US seems to have elected a man who is very talented at sticking his foot in his mouth should not detract from the reasons for why the system was set up as it was.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I do know that merely the fact that the US seems to have elected a man who is very talented at sticking his foot in his mouth should not detract from the reasons for why the system was set up as it was.

The electoral college was ironically set up to prevent the exact situation that just happened from happening - letting a tyrant into the presidency.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

@Strangerland and @yamashi, the majority of Americans voted for Hillary Clinton and not Trump. As I sit at my desk in Toku, Tokyo wonders what my green card is worth? If the rights of some green card holders are revoked, all green card holders are in danger. Perhaps Trump will issue an order to deport green card holders. I am so happy to be home in Japan with my family :)

2 ( +4 / -2 )

It's bit more of being submissive, but we don't have to worry about that blemish in our future history books.

Lol Shaking hands is submissive? silly silly.

To what level? You don't know or the exact ties and business relationship, again. You are speculating.

To the level that Trump has business interests in the countries that are not listed in the EO. The same countries where the 9/11 attackers were actually from. Exactly how it was originally written.

It is awfully curious how we shouldn't speculate about Trump, but speculating that Obama and Cruz aren't natural born citizens was/is okay?

Very true. very interesting. Can you name one refugee implicated in a US terrorist attack?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

US abandoning its electoral college would mean that the votes of highly populated areas would carry more weight than those of less populated areas.

No, it would mean that the votes of less populated areas (smaller-population states, to be more accurate) would no longer carry more weight than those of highly populated areas (actually larger-population states).

They could basically avoid and ignore the less populated great swathes of the country in favor of the heavily populated areas.

No, there would no longer be any incentive to campaign in one state rather than another, as any location would be equally attractive a place to campaign. The current situation is that most states don't count because they are clearly in one camp or the other, and it's only the swing states, about 10-20 out of 50, which matter at all in presidential elections.

If you want to defend the current system, you have to at least understand it first. Your UN argument is the same as the one for the US Senate, which in turn has an impact on the US electoral college. But there is no logic for the electoral college having the bias that is does. The current system doesn't do what you think it does.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

@yamashi The majority of Americans wanted to vote for Donald Trump and they did it. Simple as that.

Wanted to vote? That's hard to prove. But it's easy to prove that the majority of voters voted against Trump. Don't confuse your Russian system with the US's. Yet.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

YuriOtani, don't know where your logic is coming from. Are you from one of the 7 Mid East countries on the list? Or are you sliding down a slippery-slope sense of logic?

Time to break out the popcorn and see where this Trump carnival is headed.

Agree, Saudi Arabia should be on the list, but it's not because of their oil and U.S. alliance.

But the wall and the immigration ban are not about banning all Muslims or Mexicans or whoever. Here is some perspective (Yes, it is Fox News, but it is from Bobby Jindal, son of immigrants):

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5301832226001/?#sp=show-clips

1 ( +2 / -1 )

No, it would mean that the votes of less populated areas (smaller-population states, to be more accurate) would no longer carry more weight than those of highly populated areas (actually larger-population states).

Is that accurate? Do the votes smaller-population states actually carry more weight than those of larger population states?

No, there would no longer be any incentive to campaign in one state rather than another, as any location would be equally attractive a place to campaign.

I am not sure I understand why this would be true. If state A has an estimated population of 39,250,017 and state B has an estimated population of 585,501, I cannot see any incentive to visit state B. Why wouldn't it be simply be a throwaway? Why wouldn't it simply be ignored?

If you want to defend the current system,

I don't. I have no invested interested in the system. I am just bringing up questions.

you have to at least understand it first.

Yes, that is why I am bringing up questions.

But there is no logic for the electoral college having the bias that is does.

It seems there was a logic to having it, but that it may no longer be doing the job it was intended to do.

The current system doesn't do what you think it does.

I am not sure what you think I thinik. However, I am obviously not clear on what the electoral system does. Americans themselves are so unclear on it that they are having and have been having a very heated debate about it. It seems to me that you have educated yourself about the system a lot. What, may I ask, is your solution?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

back:

Yes, smaller states are overrepresented because they have electors equal to their congress member numbers, i.e. 2 for each state (same as senators) plus others in proportion to their population (same as reps). So if you only qualify for one house rep, you still get a minimum of 3 electors.

As for campaigning, of course it makes sense to pick bigger venues etc. But with no electoral college, there would be equal incentive to pick a 5,000-seat venue in Wyoming, for example, as a 5,000-seat venue in New Hampshire. Currently Wyoming would get no attention because it is always going to vote red, while New Hampshire will always get attention because it can go either way.

My solution is to scrap the electoral college and just go by aggregate votes across the country.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Do the votes smaller-population states actually carry more weight than those of larger population states?

Yes. Arizona has a vote power of 207.05 (highest) and California has the lowest at 0.37. https://wallethub.com/edu/how-much-is-your-vote-worth/7932/

I am not sure I understand why this would be true. If state A has an estimated population of 39,250,017 and state B has an estimated population of 585,501, I cannot see any incentive to visit state B.

With the current system, the incentive is to visit states in which the party can win the electoral college, with no incentive to visit states where an electoral college win is pretty impossible. If the vote were popular vote, all votes would count, so there would be more incentive to visit all states.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Readers, no further discussion on who got more votes, please. It is not relevant to this discussion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

REMEMBER......Obama had a 6 month immigration ban in place in 2011 and nobody said a word. Left wing media bias will do everything in their power to hold on to what little relevance they have LEFT.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

@Jalapeno because it could set up a legal precedent that would allow revoking immigrant/legal status by country and not the behavior of the person.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

It is good to see the courts in the US reviewing Trump's executive orders. It does give me some piece of mind that debate is still alive in the US and that Trump clearly cannot just do whatever he wants to do.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Trump had better be careful as many Muslims, both bred in America and foreign, have been instrumental to the U.S. in their fight against terrorism. Trump risks alienating all Muslims and having no help from them, when it comes time to call upon them for it. Also, his racist stance against all Muslims, has caused many knee-jerk reactions amongst Americans against fellow Muslim-Americans, or people they assume are Muslims, just because of the way they look.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

By Saeed Ahmed, CNN Updated 11:46 AM ET, Sun January 29, 2017:

A second posted on Trudeau's Twitter feed showed him greeting a Syrian refugee. "#WelcomeToCanada," it read.

Canada has taken in about 40,000 Syrian refugees since Trudeau took office in November, 2015. In all, the US has accepted 15,000. Under Trump's executive order, the resettlement process for Syrian refugees has been halted indefinitely.

Why isn't Japan welcoming all these Muslim refugees? Trump has meaning in his madness it seems.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Funny how the media characterises this as a "muslim" ban. he just banned people coming from places where there is lot of terrorist activity which the local government has been unable to reasonably control.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Yes you did:

Not at all.

No, but it does give a YUUUUGE head start. And your claim was "he could never have created an empire business worldwide", the point being that he didn't. He was given one.

No, he created one, his father had nothing to do with Trump enterprises.

Lol Shaking hands is submissive? silly silly.

What?

To the level that Trump has business interests in the countries that are not listed in the EO. The same countries where the 9/11 attackers were actually from. Exactly how it was originally written.

Ok, noted and I am sure someone will remind Trump to put Saudi Arabia on the list, would you be satisfied then?

It is awfully curious how we shouldn't speculate about Trump, but speculating that Obama and Cruz aren't natural born citizens was/is okay?

Doesn't apply to me, I never jumped on that bandwagon.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

@fds - Although I do not agree with the way this ban is being carried out as it is encompassing way too many people who should not be caught up in it, I think you are making a good point. It is estimated there are 1.6 Billion Muslims in the world. This ban will impact a small percentage of them. The most populous Muslim nations are Indonesia followed by Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

there is nothing radical, Obama did not allow visas from Iran for 6 months, we owe nothing to foreigners. Go somewhere else

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

@Jalapeno, I am sure this is a test to see it Trump can get away with it. I am positive other countries will be added if this is approved by the judicial system.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

there is nothing radical, Obama did not allow visas from Iran for 6 month

You should probably fact check yourself. The country wasn't Iran, and the people from the actual country (I'll let you google it to figure out which country) were never blocked from applying, there was just a backlog while they faced additional vetting.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Interesting that President Trump had a phone call with the King of Saudi Arabia today and they basically agreed to all the support he wants against ISIS and Islamic terrorists.

Discussed Saudi paying for safe zones, refugee support, support against Iranian aggression and even the Muslim Brotherhood. Thats very productive and if that was done by Saudi to stay off the list, that was a very strategic decision by Trump and his team.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-saudi-idUSKBN15D14L

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

The chaos caused by the "massive success" of Trump's off-the cuff executive orders is just a storm in a teacup compared to what he'll serve up in the coming months once he really gets in over his head and just becomes drunk with power. After all, he spent a very pleasant, laid-back first week sitting at his presidential desk in the Oval Office practicing signing his name on pieces of paper. Whatever he lacks as a president in competency and gravitas, we at least now know that he can write his own name (he even shows his signature each time to the world on camera to prove it's no fake). If things get much worse, it may be time for the world to give him the "Castro treatment" with a full embargo!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

What can U do with a man that lives in his own Trump towers and think in his mind that all muslims are bad people ???. What can U do with a head of state that thinks like hitler ???.What can U do with a white man that can only tell the difference in currency. Even before he make America great again, he is boasting to his own people, look I am great, my family is great but there are 80% of middle class american white workers , who cannot make ends meet ???. This is the sign of a child that just got his Toy. Dont talk aby competency, talk abt how to stop bullying simple people who are muslims and not killers.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

He sure does, but he sold all of his assets, so we don't need to talk about what once was.

Can you prove this? If you can't, don't speculate. We know how you feel aboot speculation. Teehee ;)

For the record, he did not sell his assets, so fake news to that.

Yeah, well, anyway and as a matter of fact, when the right pressed Obama about his college transcripts, he showed them and I thought at that time. It was equally as irrelevant.

This is like the equivalent of neg hitting. "Everyone says you're stupid, but I think you sre genius."..."Everyone dogged Obama for his diplomas, but I sure that was overboarded." Alright man, way to not make about Obama again.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

@bass but he sold all of his assets

That's fake news, alternative facts, a distortion of truth or perhaps a fiction held by true believers, those who've drunk so much of their political messiah's kool aid they're no longer able to reason.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2017/01/11/donald-trump-will-hand-over-business/#4f60017f59d4

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Trump may get his wish, as I've heard many foreigners, and not just Muslims, but from all countries, are now thinking twice about going to the U.S., for fear of being mistaken for being Muslim-looking. Many people are now fearing of traveling to the U.S. and having to deal with the added hassle of being put through extra screening at immigration. So, Trump may end up getting his America, of only Americans living there.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Can Trump supporters tell me anything about the current vetting process and what the proposed changed will be?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

No, most people are not familiar with the current vetting process other than we are told to trust that it is sufficient to protect the USA.

This is why the 90 days restriction was put in to place. It gives the new President and his Administration time to review what the current vetting process is, decide what changes they deem necessary, publicize those to everyone and then execute. I dont think that is unreasonable to have time to review and make needed changes.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

"This is why the 90 days restriction was put in to place. It gives the new President and his Administration time to review what the current vetting process is, decide what changes they deem necessary, publicize those to everyone and then execute."

A bit of advice. When taking about Trump and his administration, choose your words carefully. That last verb made me jump.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Am I to believe that every Trump supporter on board with this has no idea what's being done? Seems a bit emotional.

Liberals are the very last people to call ANY Trump supporter emotional.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

The biggest concern is that the CBP isn't following Federal judge orders. No one can subvert your courts, not even your president. Otherwise your Constitution is over

If nothing else Trump is showing where more safeguards need to be added to ensure court compliance

0 ( +1 / -1 )

You all have read into this completely wrong!!!! Originally planned this was Obama's planned until he flopped because of re-election and also large corporation. let me ask a few questions. What part of the US laws Trump is not following. The POTUS have the right to "ban VISA's and permanent residency at anytime and at his discretion". Donald Trump when he was sworn in went to the CIA, this was an order that the CIA gave to him to block the borders. Everyone knew what his plan was and that was to shut off the borders and tighten immigration. What has happened is once he was sworn in the US had 45,000 illegal immigrant coming from as far as Africa, Cuba and Syria trying to get into the US. President Trump was also told that terrorist was also trying to get into the country so in order to seal the border off and people coming into the country he put a hold on Everyone and that was to vet those with green cards and visa from 90-120 to make sure they were who they said they were because of unknown threats!!!! Now ask your self people are saying why didn't he let people know before they boarded planes and made reservation, simple he didn't want everyone to come at one time trying to beat the rush of his plan. His plan only mentioned those from known terrorist countries of operation. He never said he was not going to let people with green cards or visas in the country, he just said we need to weed out the bad ones. Another note now you have the large Tech companies crying foul about their workers not being able to come back into the country. If they were so concerned they can go to one of their corporate office and work until the ban is over. These are tech companies crying over spilled milk. Second you have all these protestors, these are millions of people who currently are in the US with VISA's and green cards. TRUMP Never said he was going to deport them. Their crying foul is they had a parent who is of old age and kids that they were trying to get into the US before Trump immigration plan tighten. Ask yourself why would a 70 year old mother with heart problems and all of her worldly possession traveling on a flight to the US with a one way ticket? Why would a wife with 7 kids come on a plane to the US with all of their worldly possessions and when asked why she was coming to visit she said the schools were better and she wanted to visit her relatives. Simple these people had no intentions on returning even though they had visas. Again just because you have a visa doesn't mean you have to be admitted. Just because you have a green card doesn't mean you can stay forever, you are not a permanent citizen you are a temporary or permanent resident. All these people protesting are only protesting for their own good. They don't care about following the law, their aim is to break it and then cry foul or discrimination and say "This is un-American" I ask them what is it to be an American. Does it mean come to America learn the language, and assimilate and not force an unknown culture on the American people. It means come here the correct way like all other LEGAL. Work hard and not sponge off the system. Americans are tired of hearing this country was built by immigrants. Yes that is true, but that was a long time ago and a different type of immigrant not one in which we are seeing today that is coming to the US poor, broke and looking for a handout. The immigrant before came poor broke and they worked their tales off and learned the language and blended into the culture. These politicians who are crying foul is only looking to get rich and these are the people whom they cater to. The attorneys are in the airports like flies on feces, praying on thee victims and this is the same way these politicians who get in front of the TV cameras and protect these people who are not citizens of the country. In the past 16 years this country has went backwards, and we have problems that needs to be fixed an its time for these countries to take care of their own people and stop crying foul when the US close the gates.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

just because you have a visa doesn't mean you have to be admitted.

actually yes, that's what it means. By the law of the United States. Green card holders too.

Every court in the land when they hear court cases will win, unless rabid republicans stop the courts too

It's either a rule of law system with courts, or King Trump

0 ( +2 / -2 )

So if Trump supporters are supporting policy they know nothing about, is it fair to call them emotional and acting out of fear?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Oh my...

Did media fuel protests over immigration executive order?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heqYlqfcR1A

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

@kaimycahl,

Finally a post that warrants interest. Thank you.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

So if Trump supporters are supporting policy they know nothing about, is it fair to call them emotional and acting out of fear?>

Nice try. The only policy I am supporting is to give the new administration time to review the current vetting process and determine if it is being done adequately or not. One of the perks of being elected is that you get to review everything the previous guy was doing and change it is you think it is insufficient. For example the San Bernadino killers were active on Facebook, which was not checked as part of the vetting process. Maybe the new administration decides they want to do that after this 90 days is up, they need time to look into how that can happen first.

Does the new manager at work come in and just accept everything the previous guy was doing as good? Especially when his handpicked successor was not chosen? Nope the new guy reviews everything and adjusts it to meet what he thinks is best.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

The media is simply on a smear campaign against Trump. Just ridiculous but i guess it`s good for their bank accounts.

@theeastisred,

Electoral college is the best system for the US. In fact, not many countries have a democratic voting system like youd like. Cali and NY shouldnt run the country.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

The media is simply on a smear campaign against Trump.

So please list the things that the media has claimed Trump has said, that he hasn't actually said.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Thankfully it is not the number of posts nor the loudest voices that prevails, but the Constitution and the rule of law, like in most countries. Either you follow the rules of your Constitution or not. Otherwise you now live under King Trump decrees / executive orders. Papers please? Have you paid your Indulgences? Looks like the major corporations on Trump's advisor board (except for Tesla and Uber) are in line. Might want to check out who has been silent. Scary stuff.

The expected lawsuits from states against Washington are already starting.

Once the courts are full of Trump Republicans and corporate shills the country is gone though. That empty space on the Supreme Court is going to be a whopper. if that's filled with another country destroying Republican, USA will undoubtedly degenerate into a "Christian" Iran, and then the real news begins

The geopolitical irony is that Trump's love of Putin will drive Japan to also consider Russia as the replacement ally to offset China influence in the region under a weak USA. Russia is left holding all the cards once the USA implodes. It doesn't have to do anything or say anything, just wait.

Probably a good idea to stop all this ahead of time. I can see why this is bringing in nationwide and worldwide protests. Ramifications are worldwide with large influential swings possible. European nations having to hold back Russia are rightly concerned that a weak USA wouldn't hold them back in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania etc.

The world that the USA held together is showing its loose threads

Hope for the best that it doesn't unravel entirely and the court cases win.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Trump's policy didn't cause it, liberal protesters did.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Trump's policy didn't cause it, liberal protesters did.

And in similar news, sparks don't cause fire! For more fake news, see Faux News.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Conspiracy theories floating again, can you prove this probably much easier than President Orange theory that 3~5 million illegal Mexicans voted for Hillary or his inauguration crowd was the biggest in US history.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"Little Hiltler" has lost his case in front of Constitution and law. Cased closed!

Being elected president does not mean you have all god's power.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites