monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Former New York Mayor and Trump ally Rudy Giuliani said in an interview Saturday that President Donald Trump asked him to find a way to "legally" enact the ban on Muslim immigration he repeatedly touted on the campaign trail.

"Does the ban have anything to do with religion?" Fox News host Jeanine Pirro asked Giuliani. "How did the President decide the seven countries?"

"When he first announced it, he said Muslim ban," Giuliani said. "He called me up, he said 'Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally.'"

...He denied that the executive order to implement "extreme vetting" the President signed Friday had anything to do with religion.

"What we did was we focused on, instead of religion, danger," Giuliani said.

He said it was a "factual basis, not a religious basis."

This is incorrect, as the order stipulates that Christians and other members of minority religions be given priority over Muslims.

Do some research... seek out the truth

“I hope Trump enjoys losing. He’s going to lose so much we’re going to get sick and tired of his losing,” ACLU National Political Director Faiz Shakir told Yahoo News shortly after the decision was announced.

FWIW an GOPer at retreat this week corrected me when I said "Obamacare" and told me they want to stick to calling it "Affordable Care Act"

I believe eventually they’ll come around. Because Medicare and Social Security faced the same kind of criticism. Before Medicare came into law, one Republican warned that “one of these days, you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free.” That was Ronald Reagan. And eventually, Ronald Reagan came around to Medicare and thought it was pretty good, and actually helped make it better.

So that’s what's going to happen with the Affordable Care Act. And once it's working really well, I guarantee you they will not call it Obamacare.

Quote Brandon:

Quote:

No, it isn't racism. That's incorrect logic. Trump had a specific and frequently discussed policy regarding Mexico, so it is perfectly possible that someone with a family connection with Mexico would have a different position than someone without a connection to Mexico.

You're racist. You want to disqualify judges from presiding over cases based on race or ethnicity. By your logic, a judge of Italian descent could not preside over a trial of a Mafia member, and a Jewish judge could not preside over the case of a Jewish stock swindler.

Sorry, we don't disqualify judges based on their ethnicity.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Trump had a specific and frequently discussed policy regarding Mexico, so it is perfectly possible that someone with a family connection with Mexico would have a different position than someone without a connection to Mexico.

What family connection with Mexico, Brandon? Are you talking about his ethnicity?

other Mexican judges might not be fair.