back to article Grumpy Trump trumped, now he's got the hump: Muslim ban beaten back by appeals court

President Trump has suffered a serious blow to his authority following a decision by a court of appeals against his controversial travel ban. Late Thursday, the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco denied an emergency motion to lift an injunction against the ban, which restricted people from seven Muslim-majority countries from …

  1. vir Silver badge

    "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

    To which the ACLU replied:

    "We have been saying this for a while."

    1. Sampler

      Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

      Ploy all along, I think he knew it wouldn't fly, that it'd get struck down, but now, it's not his fault, he's tried, he's done what he said he would on the campaign trail, and the elite have stopped him, the liberals are holding the nations safety back. It plays into his narrative perfectly.

      1. Lost In Clouds of Data
        FAIL

        Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

        I disagree. He promised he'd keep 'America safe'. If a terrorist attack happens now, no matter what the reason, he'll have failed to keep one of his biggest and boldest campaign promises.

        He made the promise, it's up to him to keep it within the bounds of the law and the Constitution of the United States.

        Add to the that his wall probably won't even start to be built for several years, he'll be hard pushed to win another term (assuming Congress doesn't see an opportunity to impeach his ass before then, in a shameless attempt to look reasonable to the electorate before the mid-terms).

        His popularity is already tanking, and it isn't even a month in and has a major judicial showdown AND and embarrassing military failure under his belt; it's altogether not looking good for the orange buffoon. He was already looking weak and ineffectual and this 3-0 appellate court decision against him makes it even worse and further solidifies the fact you can't rule by EOs and PMs alone.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

          Uh...what? "He made the promise, it's up to him to keep it within the bounds of the law and the Constitution of the United States."

          Stop right there, buddy. That's not how this works. Trump made promises. Trump drained the swamp. Trump shook up Washington. Everything that didn't happen exactly as he said it would is because of obstruction by disgusting progressive liberals who hate America. The only way to make America great again is to elect Trump a second time. And then a third! And a fourth! Never elect someone who is not Trump!

          This thing where you think Trump voters are going to look at Trump's record as though he hast o play by any rules whatsoever is...wrong. That simply isn't how his base performs communes with alternate facts.

          1. a viperous worm that gnaws the bowels

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            If you define Trump's base as those who'll stand by their man now matter what, then where are they now? Why aren't they out there supporting his sagging poll numbers? If he can't constantly stick it to the liberals and win, win, win, he'll keep losing the confidence of those who make up his base. And his casual supporters will abandon his unpopular extremism and turn to insider team players like Ryan and McConnell to get things done.

          2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            Calm down Trevor. Perhaps you should go and sit in a darkend room for a while?

            Trump can't be elected for more than two terms. That is the law and even a GOP controlled congress would want to repeal that given their antipathy of the current TWIC (Tweeter in Chief).

            There is still lots of things he can do to in his words 'shake up America'. Other people will see it as destroying the american way of life. I know that many of my american friends are looking at leaving.

            If the TWIC does not like the ruling then he can as he said, see them in court. That is due process but I do get the feeling that he'll lose the case as it currently stands. There are many organistations ready to take him on in a legal battle.

            As the americans say, 'Popcorn time'.

            1. Charles 9 Silver badge

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              "Trump can't be elected for more than two terms."

              That's assuming they don't just tear up the Constitution and stage a coup. After all, laws in the end are just ink on a page.

              1. Lars Silver badge

                Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                "Trump can't be elected for more than two terms.". Yes that*s a problem but could explain his admiration for that guy in North Korea and Putin. A strong leader is a leader for life no doubt.

            2. Aqua Marina Silver badge

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              The cynic in me says that the Donald will attempt to issue an EO that allows religious discrimination. That worked out well in Germany, and he seems to be going down the same route.

            3. sniperpaddy

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              Change TWIC to TWIT and I'm with you.

            4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              "Trump can't be elected for more than two terms."

              Whoosh.

            5. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              "Trump can't be elected for more than two terms."

              There is more than one Trump.

              Dynasties. They're a thing.

              1. Eddy Ito Silver badge

                Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                Dynasties. They're a thing.

                Sorry Trevor, perhaps you missed half the purpose of this past election. Clinton/Bush, it doesn't matter, we're done.

          3. Stoke the atom furnaces

            "Trump drained the swamp."

            Seen his tax returns? Trump is the swamp.

          4. Richard Plinston Silver badge

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            > The only way to make America great again is to elect Trump a second time. And then a third! And a fourth! Never elect someone who is not Trump!

            One of the commentators on the inauguration said that it was great to see that 4 past presidents had attended, and also that the next 4 presidents were there (as his children walked in).

        2. Sampler

          Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

          "I disagree. He promised he'd keep 'America safe'. If a terrorist attack happens now, no matter what the reason, he'll have failed to keep one of his biggest and boldest campaign promises."

          But that's my entire point, anything goes wrong and he points to the immigration ban not being inplace (even if it transpires they're from Jersey) - that's his level and the level he's playing to, everything else is alternative facts and fake news.

          1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            "everything else is alternative facts and fake news"

            And? So? What does that mean?

            If the people whose votes actually matter only care about alternative facts and fake news then why does the truth, evidence or actual facts matter? Have you even read 1984? It has some lessons about how you can run a post-truth nation that I think you missed.

            I promise you: Steve Bannon didn't miss those lessons at all.

            1. jamesb2147

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              @Trevor - Tongue in cheek much?

              You disagreed with @Sampler, then reiterated his point. My head is spinning.

          2. veti Silver badge

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            Well, what this shows us is that the man has no interest in governing. He's still campaigning.

            Remember, he doesn't have to answer any difficult questions about what he does. Because the only media his base believes is the media that he, or his henchmen, directly and personally control. They've been taught that everything else is fake and lies, so it simply doesn't matter what any half-way neutral reporter or outlet says.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              I guess you were not paying attention to the media during the election, or any other time.

              98 out of 100 of the top publications in the US were opposing trump. Just were do you think you can find even 'half-way neutral' reporting?

              1. ridley

                Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                Define opposing Trump.

                Do you mean that they portrayed him and a misogynistic, racist, bigoted serial liar, then you are wrong they didn't portray him like that, he did.

                Any commentary from the press say he was/is not fit for president was just stating the bleeding obvious.

              2. Dan 55 Silver badge

                Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                Just were do you think you can find even 'half-way neutral' reporting?

                Perhaps they are neutrally reporting that this is a clusterfuck?

                Neutral means publishing articles based on the complete range of facts available, not bending the article's text to be neutral even though the facts don't back this up.

              3. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                "... 98 out of 100 of the top publications in the US were opposing trump. Just were do you think you can find even 'half-way neutral' reporting?"

                I'm not sure you understand what neutral means: It does not mean that 50% has to be in favor and 50% against any batshit crazy idea...

                1. naive

                  Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                  Yes, you are right, Soros and a handful others own all the mainstream news media and the politicians in Europe.

                  They lost the US president as their lackey, but then still have a rear guard of judges and Republican traitors on their payroll. It is not over until all these catalysts of evil are stopped in their tracks.

                  The replies in this thread show, they still manage to shepherd the opinion of the ignorant quite well.

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                  "I'm not sure you understand what neutral means: It does not mean that 50% has to be in favor and 50% against any batshit crazy idea...".

                  Quite right. completely batshit crazy ideas are 52:48, not 50:50

              4. Charles 9 Silver badge

                Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                "98 out of 100 of the top publications in the US were opposing trump. Just were do you think you can find even 'half-way neutral' reporting?"

                You can't. He's a "for us or against us" type of guy. To him, there is no neutral.

              5. sniperpaddy

                Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                What you are missing is that the muppets who voted for Trump WERE NOT READING THE TOP PUBLICATIONS.

                They were reading the tin-hatter alternative fact media.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                  >> What you are missing is that the muppets who voted for Trump WERE NOT READING THE TOP PUBLICATIONS.

                  They were reading the tin-hatter alternative fact media.

                  They can read? Huh. Who knew?

              6. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

                >> Just were do you think you can find even 'half-way neutral' reporting?

                Fox News? (2 words that don't naturally fit in the same sentence)

                Oh hang on a sec... you said "neutral". I withdraw my answer

            2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              "any half-way neutral reporter or outlet says."

              Are there any of those left in the US?

          3. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken Silver badge

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            "But that's my entire point, ..."

            And it should a valid point - but isn't in this context.

            Your point relies entirely on there being at least one iota of rational thought in the Prez and/or his fanbase. Sadly, this isn't so.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              You're assuming that all Trump voters are people who read or watch the polarized media. He also needed the people who were so desperate to vote Outsider that they gave him a chance.

          4. This post has been deleted by its author

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

              these b*stards?

          5. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            "even if it transpires they're from Jersey"

            I didn't know the Channel Islands were a hotbed of terrorism.

          6. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            You are so right. This is what Americans really need to be afraid of. That Nazi fucker Bannon wants a war with China, thinks white christians are already in a global war against muslims (blacks hispanics and asians don't count for shit on his shoe in his universe unless they are indian geeks that code his websites). He's desperate for a war because it's the only way he can get around the checks and balances.

            This ruling plays so nicely into his alternative facts narrative .. Despite the George W appointed judge who issued the stay AND the republican appointed judge on the appeal panel voting alongside his democrat appointed counterparts, the narrative is already: liberal elite judges appointed by commie-faggot-muslim-kenyan-born Obama supported by the Sorros-global-jewish-conspiracy-cabal are thwarting the WILL OF THE SHEEPLE (seriously, if you want to shoot yourself, read some of the nutbrained crap output from the wacko conspiracy theorists and obscure, barely vaguely concealed neo nazi white supermacist "thinkers" that inform the likes of Bannon, Miller and Trump)

            You can just see him playing to Trumps narcissism and need for control... "the only way we can drain the swamp Mr President is to get emergency powers. Murica is broken with liberal scum able to block you through the courts and liberal scum media lying to slander you and make you unpopular. We need to show them all muslims are dangerous and evil." And off Bannon will go and concoct some massive atrocity committed by muslims from some of those countries forcing a supine repub congress to grant the president extra-ordinary powers. (Not in jersey though .. Trump thinks jersey is full of illegal hispanics who cheered in their hundreds of thousands when the twin towers came down so he doesn't give 2 fucks and pussy grab for anyone there.)

            Then the courts will be ignored and all but fox, breibart and other batshit crazy right wing media will be gagged. Heil Bannon!!!

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

        But to what end? Now Trump has blown his load early, he's got nothing to do but twiddle his thumbs for 4 years.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

          "But to what end? Now Trump has blown his load early, he's got nothing to do but twiddle his thumbs for 4 years."

          There is plenty he hasn't ruined yet. Give him time.

      3. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Unhappy

        Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

        "it plays into his narrative perfectly"

        Don't forget the supreme court challenge. that's next. Nobody thought the leftist liberal elitists would lay down and allow Trump to have his presidency, and this is just an example of what's to come, it seems. George Soros has a LOT of pocket change to disrupt everything and create the chaos into which loudmouthed liberals can "take charge" and dismantle what freedoms we have left... by ABusing the legal system.

        1. Rich 11 Silver badge

          Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

          Nobody thought the leftist liberal elitists would lay down and allow Trump to have his presidency

          Yes. Those masked hitmen were all ready to swing into action. Time and again we thought that would be the real solution, as everyone said at the time. Yet somehow not a shot was fired and Trump ascended safely to the pinnacle of his dreams. Those goddamn lily-livered yellow liberals just chickened out, didn't they, Bob? They just couldn't give the kill order, not like a True American would.

          1. sniperpaddy

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            I love your sarcasm. Shame it's too subtle for the morons you're directing it at. Keep words to one syllable or less and avoid apostrophes at all costs.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

            "They just couldn't give the kill order, not like a True American would."

            They should have asked Barry. He has no problem with assassinating US citizens as long as he can use drones.

        2. Hollerithevo Silver badge

          Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

          Would that Mr Soros had that power, but his spending ability falls far below the Kochs and Wall family etc. I guess the liberals are giving Trump as much hassle as the far right gave Obama. It's called politics.

        3. strum Silver badge

          by ABusing the legal system.

          I see - so, enforcing the law is abusing the legal system. I think we can all see where you are coming from (and going).

        4. Stork Bronze badge

          Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

          @Bombastic Bob: Why should they? The Republicans did not exactly roll over and let Obama have everything he wanted, did they?

          I think there was even a shutdown of government, but hey, my impression as an outsider is that the system is designed like that :-)

        5. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

          "Don't forget the supreme court challenge."

          Hey Buob, where do you stand on the Obama BIRTH certificate issue? Or did you NEVER acknowledge he was actually THE PRESIDENT?

      4. Charlie Clark Silver badge

        Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

        Ploy all along, I think he knew it wouldn't fly, that it'd get struck down

        There are several problems with this:

        • the way the order was drafted and communicated
        • the attacks on the judiciary
        • but, most importantly, he's not running for election: the campaign is over
        He no longer needs the votes of the saps who voted for him in November. But he is going to need cross-party support in Congress to pursue his agenda, which may include attempts to reduce the powers of both the legislature and the judiciary, and the courts, particularly the Supreme Court, to get anything done. And this is going to be the biggest challenge: popularity contests and nowtrage aside, at some point things like a budget and raising of the debt ceiling have to be done. Appeal to the base at the moment have no effect. The attempts to discredit the media will continue but with the courts that's going to be more difficult and the US setup is specifically there to prevent rule by decree.

        Campaign mode might resume next year in the run up to the mid-terms with the hope of gaining a super majority in the Senate to push for constitutional change, which is clearly what Bannon, et al. are after. Trump, as ever, just wants to be popular.

      5. Purple-Stater

        Re: "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"

        "Ploy all along, I think he knew it wouldn't fly, that it'd get struck down, but now, it's not his fault, he's tried, he's done what he said he would on the campaign trail, and the elite have stopped him, the liberals are holding the nations safety back. It plays into his narrative perfectly."

        For any normal politician this would be both perfect and correct. But Trump is neither normal, nor a politician. His personality cannot tolerate the impression that he might be wrong, or might have failed at something. Well, at least not unless it's somebody else's fault.

  2. Spotswood

    Trumped

    I can't help but feel this is over almost before it began. Even the people that took Trump seriously will have a hard time doing it now.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Lost In Clouds of Data

      Re: Trumped

      Never under estimate the amazing stupidity and gullibility of many of the folk that voted for him.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Trumped

      RE"Even the people that took Trump seriously will have a hard time doing it now."

      But Big John and Bombastic Bob haven't shown up yet. Life will find a way.

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: Trumped

        Yow! Are we having FUN yet?!

        1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken Silver badge

          Re: Trumped

          Very much so. In fact, I might spontaneously orgasm at any time now.

          1. agatum

            Re: Trumped

            I might spontaneously orgasm at any time now.

            That kind of information on a need to know basis only, thank you.

          2. sniperpaddy

            Re: Trumped

            I'm ready to ovulate and I'm a bloke.

    4. Big John Silver badge

      Re: Trumped

      > "I can't help but feel this is over almost before it began."

      Over? How so? One leftist judge was found that was willing to exceed his authority. The infamous Ninth Circuit Court sided with him, the same circuit that has been overridden more than any other. THIS has you feeling victory over the President?

      I know you would be more comfortable in your bubble, but knowing what is to come I feel obligated to inform you of certain facts so they don't eventually crash in on your delicate mind and destroy it.

      Sure, right now the ban might be on hold, but the future awaits, and it doesn't contain victory for you very soon. Trump may face a setback now, but do you think this is going to stop him? Will it crush him? No, it won't. And you know this too. TRY to deny it!

      He will regroup, and learn, and go at it again, because it needs to be done. Most of the Middle East countries seem to have little problem with his ban, did you know that? One way or another the flood of migrants (future Democrat voters) will be choked off. Really. The damage Obama did to our country will be repaired, and the insane left will be revealed as the small minority they are. Trust me, I've lived long enough to see more than one cycle of this type.

      Okay, maybe the country is different now, but I kinda doubt it's changed all that much. And about those future Dem voters? Most of them will slowly become Americans and will stop believing in the pap squirted at them by the Left, and become the conservatives they really are. Just a matter of time.

      The Left will ALWAYS be a noisy violent minority. It's actually a good thing. Keeps the conservative majority from becoming soft and complacent. Thank you.

      1. Rafael #872397
        Joke

        Re: I feel obligated to inform you of certain facts

        We don't know what we'll do without you. Please don't stop.

      2. scarletherring

        Re: Trumped

        <quote>The Left will ALWAYS be a noisy violent minority.</quote>

        You, Sir, have that exactly backwards.

      3. jake Silver badge

        Re: Trumped

        John, you're turning into a caricature. Please continue. You're funny :-)

      4. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

        Re: Trumped

        Oh, Baghdad John; never stop being who you are.

      5. sniperpaddy

        Re: Trumped

        This is a justification for the separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary so that one man cannot set himself up as Hitler.

        It may be distasteful if you don't get your way every time but in the long run it keeps democracy safe.

        Try widening your political perspective by reading how Alexander Lukashenko hijacked a democracy in Belarus. http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/peopleandpower/2016/01/belarus-europe-dictator-160120104016003.html

      6. Charlie Clark Silver badge

        Re: Trumped

        Most of the Middle East countries seem to have little problem with his ban, did you know that?

        What the ones with the good ties to the US like the Emirates and Saudi Arabia? You might want to look at the list of countries from which there are known international terrorists and wonder why they're not on the list.

        As a European I'm looking forward to all the business from Iran and elsewhere that will come our way as the US withdraws from international trade.

      7. 2460 Something

        Re: Trumped

        He will regroup, and learn

        Are you sure he will learn? I heard he has difficulty reading, which affects thinking strategies and comprehension.

      8. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Trumped

        "The infamous Ninth Circuit Court sided with him, the same circuit that has been overridden more than any other."

        Tell me, how many unanimous appeals rulings were overturned by SCOTUS (remember, the decision has no dissent, meaning ALL THREE were in agreement)?

      9. smartypants

        Re: 'leftist'

        This word is doing the rounds. It's used by people to slag off anyone who gets in the way of a narcissist and his all-night dreams.

        Even people who are really quite right wing fall under the steam roller of this term.

        If you don't support Trump, ergo Leftist!

        This has been done countless times before by regimes spiralling into a pit of darkness.

        Honestly, why not calm down instead and have a cup of tea, rather than screaming LEFTIST! at the dog and postman.

      10. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Trumped

        >> He will regroup, and learn, and go at it again

        The Donald has no need to "learn" - he already knows all that is worth knowing

      11. Blank Reg

        Re: Trumped

        So the republican judge appointed by Bush is a leftist?

  3. John H Woods Silver badge

    Definition

    Presidential (adj.) have a bearing befitting a president, i.e. confident, dignified and statesmanlike.

    Honestly I don't have any friends I could forgive for posting, drunk or not, an all caps tweet that said "SEE YOU IN COURT" --- my flabber is truly gasted.

    1. Wibble

      Re: Definition

      Presidential from the geezer who said "grab them by the c**t"

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Presidential from the geezer who said "grab them by the c**t"

        Fake news! I believe he said "p*ssy".

        1. JJKing Bronze badge

          Re: Presidential from the geezer who said "grab them by the c**t"

          Fake news! I believe he said "p*ssy".

          Same place, different word but it is still sexual assault in the context he used it.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Definition

      Obligatory non-xkcd: http://paintraincomic.com/

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I wonder if Trump's nominated judge will be sitting on the Supreme Court bench when it comes to a decision on this issue. He is apparently on record expressing disquiet about Trump's attitude to judges who disagree. Trump is setting up a grudge match with the Supreme Court judges.

    Once the new man is on the Supreme Court bench he is effectively freed of many political and career restraints - and can then follow his own conscience and integrity. I suspect he may not end up as such a hard line conservative as Trump expects.

    There are precedents for judges who have reached their final career stage - and would not interpret laws arbitrarily in favour of a head of state decree.

    Unless Trump finds a way to blackmail or realistically threaten the judges and their families - then he will find it difficult to just dismiss them.

    1. Old Used Programmer

      Gorsuch would have to be confirmed and sitting on the court when the case is argued before it in order to have a say in deciding the case.

      As for changes once on the Supreme Court...look up Earl Warren.

      Trump has no way to remove a sitting judge. It can only be done by Congress through impeachment (in the House) and conviction (in the Senate). It's only been done 8 times in US history.

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Or a true patriot holder of 2nd amendment rights who responds to a 3am tweet about a pinko-commie-terrorist loving judge stopping Americas being Great Again

      2. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. ridley

      Supreme court judges cannot be dismissed.

    3. Voland's right hand Silver badge
      Devil

      Once the new man is on the Supreme Court

      Even if he is successfully cleared by then, he will be the sole dissenting opinion. If at all.

      Supremes do not take contempt of the judicial system lightly. Based on his attitude expressed so far if Trump is stupid enough to persist (which he is) he is setting himself up for a massive whack. My guess will be an 8:1 judgement (if Gorshuch is past the vote by then).

      Now if the Eu can make my day and hand back the papers to the new US ambassador and ask him to leave the building...

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge

        The new.man who called Trump's attacks on the judiciary 'demoralising' and 'disheartening' and is known to be a constitutionalist is supposedly going to turn this ban around?

        Nope. Not going to happen. No way.

      2. Jaybus

        Re: Once the new man is on the Supreme Court

        I disagree with that assessment. There has been more than one case, and not all courts have agreed to stay the order. See Judge Gorton's (District of Massachusetts) decision at http://d279m997dpfwgl.cloudfront.net/wp/2017/02/Gorton-order.pdf

        Unlike Robards, Gorton discusses legal arguments in detail. It seems the SCOTUS has its work cut out, since the Immigration and Nationality Act clearly does give the President authority to "impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate". Pretty much a Constitutional crisis, so I doubt that anywhere near a unanimous (or quick) decision is forthcoming.

    4. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Gorsuch is strongly in favour of states' rights. Any judge likely to rule in favour of states over abortion bans, is just as likely to rule in their favour against overreach of the federal government. And there are going to be plenty of those going forward.

      But, in any case, given that he'll best questioned on this in the hearings, he would have to recuse himself from the case, should be approved by the time any case is brought.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Many of us in The Resistance prefer to refer to The Orange Utang as "Number 45"

    Would appreciate if you would do the same.

    1. Geoffrey W Silver badge

      45?

      "45 contains reliability, patience, focus on building a foundation for the future, and wit. 45 is worldly and sophisticated"

      http://affinitynumerology.com/number-meanings/number-45-meaning.php

      I like numbers and am intrigued. Is there another meaning for 45 to which one is not privy?

      22 skiddoo to yooo...

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Yes he is the 44 man to hod the office of POTUS

        ob IT angle - the off-by-one error

        1. Geoffrey W Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Oh, of course. How mundane.

          RE 44 - If he gets evicted from the white house mid term, and there are those who think it possible, then he will be the 44.5 th POTUS and its just a rounding error.

        2. Colin Millar
          Headmaster

          43

          The alternative ob IT angle

        3. jake Silver badge

          Well, there's his problem!

          He needs a SUPER HOD!

          (c.f. British tabloids, mid 1970s, laborer supposedly making ~500 quid/week with a hod capable of handling over a hundredweight ... that's about all I remember, was long ago in a place far away.)

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: Well, there's his problem!

            Damn cat posted that for me before I could work in the obvious "and then he can build his own wall, seeing as nobody else is likely to do so" or words to that effect ...

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Well, there's his problem!

              "Damn cat posted that for me before I could work in the obvious.."

              Ah - Theresa May's new digital initiative - a trained cat censor in every home. "Lovely kittens, who'd like one of these cute kittens".

              1. Stoneshop Silver badge
                Joke

                Re: Well, there's his problem!

                "Lovely kittens, who'd like one of these cute kittens"

                The Internet of Tabbys

        4. Dan 55 Silver badge
          Alien

          Not liking this regeneration of the President, maybe he'll be the War President that future Presidents forget about afterwards, as if they had amnesia. That would explain the off-by-one error.

        5. Uncle Slacky Silver badge
          Thumb Up

          Grover Cleveland counts twice

          So in reality only 44 people have held the office, Cleveland had two non-successive terms.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        President Obama was number 44, thus Littlehands is Number 45.

        Some wags were suggesting that Mr. Obama should have resigned on Jan 19th and sworn in Biden as number 45 for a day; rendering all of Der Orange Führer's 45 branded inaugural merchandise borked. Sadly that did not happen.

    2. Sherrie Ludwig

      Number 45

      I have always liked George Takei's "Twitler"

    3. Blank Reg

      I believe he is now to be referred to as shit-gibbon, or by his full title "fascist, loofa-faced, shit-gibbon" :)

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Such a loser...

    He is so bad. A bad bad man. And a loser.

    --

    Perhaps you've noticed that the above is written using only little tiny words, such as "so bad". That's the same limited vocabulary as used by Trump, because his tiny little hands get tired if he tries to tweet longer words.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Such a loser...

      Either that, or he is simply as unintelligent as some porcine faecal matter.

      1. Bernard M. Orwell Silver badge

        Re: Such a loser...

        "porcine faecal matter"

        Combined with all the wit and self awareness of a poorly educated bucket of slugs. Orange slugs.

    2. J 3
      Happy

      Re: Such a loser...

      You forgot to end with: Sad.

      1. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge

        Re: Such a loser...

        You forgot to end with: Sad.

        And you forgot to end with an exclamation mark. So poor. Sad!

    3. Geoffrey W Silver badge

      Re: Such a loser...

      RE: "Perhaps you've noticed that the above is written using only little tiny words"

      Perhaps you've noticed; Twitter is mostly comprised of such words. His base is yuge and does not appreciate being considered stupid. You're just being elitist. If he IS a loser you can be sure he will be the greatest loser ever, the best. As will we. And it will all be our fault for not letting him win.

    4. Alister Silver badge

      I would like to congratulate you

      ...on your correct spelling of loser.

      A very rare and welcome sight.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Such a loser...

      More than Littlehands' little hands get tired, e.g. when he's on the phone with the Australian PM.

      Seems strangely fitting that he's actually the one lacking stamina after questioning HRC's stamina during the campaign, the fucking schmuck.

  7. raving angry loony

    Right wing hypocrisy.

    Two issues:

    1) amazing how a group so focussed on "law and order" is so willing to bash and denigrate the very laws they claim to support. Total and utter hypocrisy.

    2) if they wanted to protect the USA, perhaps they should have banned travellers from countries whose citizens have actually attacked the USA in the last couple of decades. Namely Saudi Arabia. More hypocrisy from the right wing Trumpites.

    The really scary thing is they're considering sending Sarah Palin as ambassador to Canada. Can we build a wall around the embassy? Please?

    1. Geoffrey W Silver badge

      Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

      OMG!! I totally missed that! TOTALLY! Sarah Palin, Ambassador. I think they are just sitting round in a back room over drinks and drugs making up shit to see what happens.

      Sarah Palin and the Offensive Canadian Stereotype are like matter and anti matter. There will be blood. And big bangs and hovering helicopters. And the return of that awesome Canadian politician who was filmed getting high whose name I totally cannot recall. And, oh, the spectacle. I almost hope it comes to pass...

      1. MAH

        Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

        Rob Ford

    2. Geoffrey W Silver badge

      Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

      RE: "perhaps they should have banned travellers from countries whose citizens have actually attacked the USA "

      Yes. They should stop US citizens who leave the Fatherland from returning home. That might cut down on some of the bloodshed, in a statistically insignificant way.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

      The really scary thing is they're considering sending Sarah Palin as ambassador to Canada. Can we build a wall around the embassy? Please?

      There is already a wall around the embassy. Those ugly-looking bollards around it are solid steel, go four meters into the bedrock, and are supposed to be able to stop a main battle tank. The exterior windows are 6-inch thick armoured glass, and are specced to stop a direct-fire shell from the same main battle tank. In fact, the whole building was designed by somebody with a bit of a fetish about main battle tanks.

      And in case you are wondering, it wasn't the Orange One: this is how America built all its embassies for the past 20 years: warm, friendly, and distinctly imperial with a light militaristic twist.

      1. graeme leggett

        Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

        "6-inch thick armoured glass, and are specced to stop a direct-fire shell from the same main battle tank"

        Does that include against HESH rounds? A purely technical question.

      2. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

        Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

        The exterior windows are 6-inch thick armoured glass, and are specced to stop a direct-fire shell from the same main battle tank.

        Would love to believe this - but you have to admit it stretches credibility.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

          The exterior windows are 6-inch thick armoured glass, and are specced to stop a direct-fire shell from the same main battle tank.

          Would love to believe this - but you have to admit it stretches credibility.

          The 6-inch armored glass bit is likely true - it was mentioned in the Ottawa Citizen profile of the building at the time it was opened back at the very end of the 20th century (sadly, the profile does not seem to be available online anymore). You can also estimate the glass thickness of the outer glass layer from the double-pattern reflections (due to the cramped layout of the site, a pedestrian can get within 20 feet of the outer walls in places). Without knowing the refractive index of the glass assembly, it is hard to be precise - but it is at least several inches thick.

          One can also see vague signs of the second glass layer behind it.

          Whether it will actually stop a high-explosive or armour-piercing shell is not for me to speculate. One interesting bit of protection requirements mentioned in the same Ottawa Citizen profile was stopping a blast from a high-explosives laden lorry in the public roadway immediately outside, 30 feet from the building wall. The same blast was estimated to cause 100+ casualties in the National Gallery building 1000 feet away if it were to happen during the gallery's busy time.

          As you might have expected, many locals (including myself at the time) somewhat justifiably felt this security posture to be somewhat incomprehensible coming from a good neighbor.

    4. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

      That would mean the US would have to ban ITSELF. Oklahoma City and Bath Township were both committed by natural born white Americans.

    5. FuzzyWuzzys Silver badge

      Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

      I wouldn't bother, Palin is such a pro gun nut she'll just turn up with a van load of PIATs and start blowing stuff up.

    6. alt_92

      Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

      > The really scary thing is they're considering sending Sarah Palin as ambassador to Canada. Can we build a wall around the embassy? Please?

      Well, it's not too far from home for her. Plenty of travel time saved. Family values and all. You know?

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

        Isn't that why they were making her Ambassador to Russia?

        she could work from home

        1. Allonymous Coward

          Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

          > she could work from home

          She can see Russia from her house!

      2. Blank Reg

        Re: Right wing hypocrisy.

        It's around 6000km from Alaska, it would be closer for her to go to Tokyo.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Ha! fuck-wad McNumbnuts got his ass slapped down!

  9. ST Silver badge
    Mushroom

    It turns out that, in the US of A ...

    ... the President is not King, and Presidential Executive Orders are subject to judicial review.

    1. Geoffrey W Silver badge
      Big Brother

      Re: It turns out that, in the US of A ...

      For now....<PREGNANT_PAUSE>...

    2. Big John Silver badge

      Re: It turns out that, in the US of A ...

      Correct. Despite what most of the lame-o's here believe, Trump works within the system and always has. Even Obama did this, bad as he was. President Trump will not break laws as he cleans out the filth left by the last Oval Occupant, and it WILL be cleaned out. And to assist him is a firmly Republican Congress, and most of the governorships and state legislatures too.

      The only real political force left to block the conservative agenda is the corporate media, and their bias is now plain for all to see. I look forward to a bright future. Do any of you? No? well, try thinking with your brain instead of your glands and maybe you will see it's not really as bad as you believe right now.

      1. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

        Re: It turns out that, in the US of A ...

        "Despite what most of the lame-o's here believe, Trump works within the system and always has"

        Can smell the bullshit on that one at a thousand paces. The tangerine fucktrumpet is doing his absolute level best to bend, break or otherwise corrupt the system, and when it has the temerity to stand in his way he takes to Twitter in the hope that his intellectually challenged minions will 'rise up' and remove the troublesome Judge - which can then be blamed on MUSLIM TERRORISTS and it's game on.

        Unfortunately for him it's now not just 1 judge but 4 who've seen through his twattery. And if the Supremes have any sense, they'll take his unconstitutional executive order, fold it into a nice hard round object and shove it up his fat fucking arse.

      2. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

        Re: It turns out that, in the US of A ...

        "Trump works within the system and always has"

        So, as a matter of fact, does Putin. The difference is that he doesn't go in for late night tweeting. Or getting his Press Secretary to promote a family business. Or denigrating judges.

        Perhaps the reason Putin wanted Trump elected - if he did - was to have a powerful world politician who made him look impressively statesmanlike. He seems to have succeeded.

      3. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

        Re: It turns out that, in the US of A ...

        If the states are so very much behind the TWIC then why did the case for overturning the Decree get files by a number of State Attourney Generals?

        You may say that they are 'blue'/lefty states.

        If the president had drafted the order differently then all this could have been avoided but no he didn't.

        He did it in haste and now he may very well have to repent.

        The USSC could even say 'we are not going to consider it'. What then eh Big John?

        The whole thing is a veritable clusterfuck.

        He has only himself to blame. Well that and the cronie/sycophants that he has around him.

        And it all could have been avoided with a bit more consulation and the willingness to take advice from others.

      4. Hollerithevo Silver badge

        Re: It turns out that, in the US of A ...

        Big John, if Trump was working within the system, he wouldn't be issuing EOs that were so easily shown to be unlawful, or liable to challenge.

        I confess to being a little blank about the 'filth' of the last Oval Office. It seemed to contain the sort of people that Trump, too has appointed: Goldman Sachs alumni, big business, vested interests (albeit different vested interests). I think Trump has some good ideas: I think all the trade agreements recently structured are bad for countries and good for corporations who do their best not to pay tax. I am all for increasing jobs for Americans in America. But I thought Obama had some good ideas, too, including a healthcare insurance system that allowed poorer people, for the first time, to have access to decent medical care.

      5. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: It turns out that, in the US of A ...

        "Trump works within the system"

        He's discovering that he can't do otherwise, but not for want of trying.

      6. Bernard M. Orwell Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: It turns out that, in the US of A ...

        "I look forward to a bright future. Do any of you?"

        Dunno. Is it orange?

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The Big Cheeto

    I AM APPALLED, APPALLED, SAD. BUY SOME OF MELANIA'S SHIT, BUY

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The Big Cheeto

      I AM APPALLED, APPALLED, SAD. BUY SOME OF MELANIA'S SHIT, BUY

      AFAIK she is not actively selling any goods at the moment and the question of her selling (or not) her goods and services once upon a time is in court too.

      So you probably mean the product of Trump's "Head of Settler" relations.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    He is not the POTUS

    He's just a very orange boy!

    1. Geoffrey W Silver badge

      Re: He is not the POTUS

      Credit where its due; He does seem to be tempering the "You've Been Tangoed" look, and the flappy hair style - just a little. Someone must be whispering in his ear, then drugging him to give him a quick trim and touch up.

      1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken Silver badge

        Re: He is not the POTUS

        We shall overcomb!

  12. doug_bostrom

    Wait until 3a US ET for the real fun to begin.

  13. Baldy50

    Although ...

    I don't agree with the mentality and someone has probably mentioned this before but I don't see the press lambasting, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Algeria, Bangladesh, Brunei, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates ban on a certain nationality from entering their countries.

    So if it's ok for them why not for another country? More Trump bashing? Oh! hang on, I forgot we're civilized so we can't do shit like that, can we!

    Sometimes the only way to deal with oppressive, unfair regimes is to show them that you mean business.

    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Although ...

      Thank you for setting out navigational markers straight.

      USA are supposed to take democracy lessons from: Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Algeria, Bangladesh, Brunei, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates

      Assad and the Ayatollahs are definitely our shining beacon in the night. We are definitely going in that direction. I will not even mention the other other petrol driven cleptocracies or failed states on your list.

      1. Palpy

        Re: Although ... @Voland, and going in directions

        Now, there's an interesting angle: Trump himself seems to be an impulsive narcissist, but his closest adviser-cum-controller is Steve Bannon. And Mr. Bannon, like the Iranian ex-president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, appears to be a believer in apocalyptic confrontation. Benjamin Netanyahu is another. Ahmadinejad believes that an end-times battle between Islam and evil will end in a triumph of Islam and the return of the Mahdi; Netanyahu believes that the Amalekites, who arise each generation and must be defeated by the Jews, are incarnate in Iran and a massive confrontation is in the offing. (Reffie: Der Spiegel, 2009)

        Bannon appears to believe in a similar messianic role for himself and his Trump. He believes the West and America in particular face an apocalyptic battle with Islam.

        "We're at the very beginning stages of a very brutal and bloody conflict, of which, if the people in this room, the people in the church, do not bind together and really form what I feel is an aspect of the church militant, to really be able to not just stand with our beliefs, but to fight for our beliefs against this new barbarity that's starting... We are in an outright war against jihadist Islamic fascism. And this war is, I think, metastasizing far quicker than governments can handle it." (Remarks to conservative Catholics at the Vatican, 2014).

        Bannon believes in a mystical "fourth turning" (reffie: Business Insider) in the face of which all other concerns are trivial: the Constitution is a bit of old paper, and the courts will scatter in the winds of change; the legislative branch will be a tool for battle or be discarded; and a leader will arise to lead the battle (a "gray champion" in the Fourth Turning lexicon, but in this case more orangish).

        So, Voland's RH, it appears that the most influential man in the US cabinet is indeed mirroring the apocalyptic-religious-nutcase beliefs we more commonly associate with radical ayatollahs and imam.

    2. ridley

      Re: Although ...

      I agree that what those are doing is bad also but the reason whybthis is not the same is that this is a decree from the POTUS.

      The US prides itself on being open, fair (even when this is a fairy tale) and a land built on a series of laws. Grudgingly I suspect a lot of us admire America, sure they make some howlers (Iraq being notable) but bye and large their heart seems in the right place. But with this POTUS it is in danger of losing that respect around the world.

      It is Trumps arbitrary "I know best and laws don't apply to me" attitude that is so against what I for one want to see from the "leader of the free world".

    3. Richard 12 Silver badge

      Re: Although ...

      The Western press do lambast those states. Quite often in fact, but you do have to listen/read foreign affairs programmes to hear it.

      And our ambassadors to those states - where they haven't been withdrawn due to same - also privately encourage those states to improve.

      Until they get ejected for saying so, anyway.

      As to why you haven't noticed it:

      US behaviour has a much larger impact on Western citizens, because many of us live there or travel there very often. It's not just foreign affairs and you'll see it on other programmes/articles as well.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Although ...

      "I don't see the press lambasting, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Libya..."

      Well, actually I see that fairly often, but usually we have come to expect those countries to act like that. If you want the USA to be categorised in that list, then your wish is close to being granted.

      How can America be Leader of the Free World, if no one respects the leader? And that's not a political thing: there are plenty of highly regarded Republicans who could do it. McCain would be a good example of someone who would have some credibility.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Although ...

        "Leader of the Free World"

        I'm not sure I approve of that term. It seems to be a contradiction in terms. If the world is free it'll make its own way.

        1. Truckle The Uncivil

          Re: Although ...

          @Dr Syntax

          No, we need leaders. But good ones not bad ones. A good leader encourages thought, shows a better way. A bad leader dictates and is authoritarian. Big differences.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Although ...

      I've visited Malaysia once, I live in Bangladesh. Yeah it's now a failed country, there's no democracy here. But still I don't know any nation who are banned here. Now very few foreigner come to my country because of it's condition but no one is banned. Are you talking about relation with Israel? Both country has unofficial relation with Israel as far I know, it's just behind the camera. Due to the absence of formal relation you can't directly go to or come from Israel or Palestine. You have to come/go via Lebanon/Egypt. While I rarely see reports of high class Israeli official coming, I don't personally know anyone who have gone there. I don't know any pilgrim who have visited Al Aqsa mosque after the creation of Israel. Israel is not well known for respecting International laws. if you're a Muslim and they arrest you, there a high chance you won't see the light of the day soon. People here fear going that country.

      No one is banned from coming here.

    6. gnasher729 Silver badge

      Re: Although ...

      "We are not worse than Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Algeria, Bangladesh, Brunei, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates". Would it make you happy if you could say that with a straight face? If yes, then you are setting the expectations for your own country very, very low.

      "Sometimes the only way to deal with oppressive, unfair regimes is to show them that you mean business."

      It was the USA who destroyed democracy in Iran in the 1950's and installed their sock puppet Shah Reza Pahlevi. The current government in Iran descends from the revolutionaries who overthrew the oppressive, unfair regime that was installed their by the USA. And then, at a time when the USA and Saddam Hussein were still best friends, they supported Iraq in a murderous war against the Iran where thousands were killed by poison gas. If you look at the moral position, I'd say the USA is way, way behind.

    7. John Presland

      Re: Although ...

      Exactly - we claim to be civilized so we can't do anti-semitic shift like that. And it was appalling that Trump omitted Jews from his Holocaust Day statement.

  14. Stoneshop Silver badge
    Holmes

    Addressing a judge?

    "SEE YOU IN COURT"

    Well, duh.

  15. largefile

    Don't let Trump speak officially in the UK.

    Hello my UK tech friends and enemies. You know me as an avowed Microsoft apologist but just this once I hope you will actually listen to me. Do not let the nutcase who is President of the US come and speak officially in the UK. When he does come to visit, if you will do me the favor of protesting, I will accept a single negative post about Microsoft without retort from each of you who choose to protest. I honestly don't know what else I might have to offer you.

    Thank you from the bottom of my Microsoft loving heart.

    Chuck

    1. Jos V
      Joke

      Re: Don't let Trump speak officially in the UK.

      2017, the year of Windows 10 and Trump..

      Tongue in cheek :-p

    2. Hey Nonny Nonny Mouse

      Re: Don't let Trump speak officially in the UK.

      We're doing our best, now if you could persuade Microsoft to up their game that'd be lovely

    3. 2StrokeRider

      Re: Don't let Trump speak officially in the UK.

      I think both Microsoft and foreigners who insert their opinions about American politics are both abominations. There....two birds with but one stone.

    4. Lars Silver badge
      Happy

      Re: Don't let Trump speak officially in the UK.

      Some English seem to have fallen in love with Trump and are determined to have the speaker of the house thrown out because he doesn't like Trump to speak in the house. The vote on this could be quite revealing regarding the balance between decency and imaginary relief from responsibility.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

  16. JWG

    Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

    Now I can understand that any of the comments here posted by citizens of the United Kingdom don't have the foggiest idea about the US Constitution, but any American citizens who've never read it, or if they did, didn't understand it (since it's written at a fifth grade reading level, (which leaves out most devout liberals, progressives, and/or Democrats) here's a clue: the US Constitution grants the President as the only decider as to what constitutes "National Security", not Congress, not the courts. Secondly, the laws on immigration which the Congress has passed over the years, have ceded to the President the authority and responsibility to carefully screen all those people who wish to enter our shores. Immigration is a privilege, not a right. The President has the right under the Cinstitution and immigration laws to refuse entry to anyone, for any reason, particularly if he/she deems such persons as potential risks to our national security. We have borders for a reason. SCOTUS has made many, many rulings over the years upholding these presidential powers. The Ninth Circuit (which has a lifetime average of being overturned by SCOTUS, even when the court was controlled by liberal justices, of over 85% - I wouldn't bet the farm that they won't be overturned, and for the umpteenth time, admonished by the Supremes for extreme judicial overreach). I'm not a big Trump supporter (it was "hose the nose" time fir the election), however, when SCOTUS gets this big sticking pile landed in their laps, their answer will likely be swift, pointed in reversing the Ninth, yet again. If you want to respond to this, please, read the constitution and 8USC1182 first before making any uniformed responses.

    1. Julian Bradfield

      Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

      One of these days, you should read your constitution. It doesn't mention the words "National Security", or even any 19th century equivalent term. It also says very little about either the powers or duties of the president.

    2. tacitust

      Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

      Beginning with an ad hom attack on the intelligence of liberals and Democrats isn't a great way to convince people you're not a Trump fan.

      As for the court's decision, well, we'll have to wait and see. Certainly the conservatives and Republicans who are happy to grant that Trump does have the power to determine immigration policy were just as adamant that President Obama didn't have such power, and he was blocked by that same Supreme Court you seem quite confident will allow Trump to proceed.

    3. SundogUK

      Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

      Yup. I'm a Brit and I know this is going to get over-turned...

    4. Stoneshop Silver badge
      Big Brother

      Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

      before making any uniformed responses.

      Yours clearly is brown.

    5. jake Silver badge

      Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

      You could have worked in "and the 9th circuit is in the Out Of Control State of California". Spleling, punctuation. sentences and paragraphs are probably outside your ken, though.

      1. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
        Pint

        Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

        jake posted a one-word joke.

        "Spleling"

        Priceless.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

          "jake posted a one-word joke."

          Indeed - my first take was of the word as "spieling".

        2. jake Silver badge

          Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

          Not a joke. Rather an intentional heading off of Muphry's law ... I've used it before, I'll use it again. Old habit, leftover from mailing lists and USENET ... although I first started using it when bleeding on (proofreading and marking up with a red pencil) inter-office memos just before the mimeograph stage. A simple mispleling on the cover-sheet produced more dates with the departmental secretary ;-)

    6. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

      Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

      "here's a clue: the US Constitution grants the President as the only decider as to what constitutes "National Security", not Congress, not the courts."

      Yeah, no it doesn't.

      "have ceded to the President the authority and responsibility to carefully screen all those people who wish to enter our shores"

      Nope. "Traditionally deferred to" does not translate to Ceded. Buy a dictionary and read it.

      "The President has the right under the Cinstitution and immigration laws to refuse entry to anyone, for any reason."

      No he doesn't. Read the 5th and 14th Amendments.

      "SCOTUS has made many, many rulings over the years upholding these presidential powers"

      Fucktrumpery. Gosh you're on a roll here.

      "I'm not a big Trump supporter"

      WHAHAHAHAHAHA

      "please, read the constitution and 8USC1182 first before making any uniformed responses"

      And by Uniformed response, you mean returning the Wayward Colony back to the Empire from whence it came, given that you've managed to fuck up the management hereof to such stellar levels?

      You win the award for the most spectacularly uniNformed post of the year. Read your own damn Constitution. And a dictionary.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

        you mean returning the Wayward Colony back to the Empire from whence it came

        Oi! We don't want it back.. we have enough problems with right-wing nutters of our own thankyouverymuch.

    7. Drew 11

      Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

      'the US Constitution grants the President as the only decider as to what constitutes "National Security"'

      That's deciderer to you, fish face.

    8. Richard Plinston Silver badge

      Re: Ahh, guys, any of you ever hear of the Constitution?

      > The President has the right under the Cinstitution and immigration laws to refuse entry to anyone,

      And yet you can't even spell it.

      But, exactly, he can refuse entry to any_one_. He can do so by naming that person.

  17. Hey Nonny Nonny Mouse

    He's not angry...

    I don't think he's angry as such, all caps in his tweet just means he's really, Really, REALLY, *REALLY* excited that he's managed to figure out all by himself* where judges work.

    *With only a little bit of help from President Bannon**

    ** And the internetz

    1. Geoffrey W Silver badge

      Re: He's not angry...

      Oh, President Bannon. I hadn't thought of that but you're right. Bannon is to Trump what Cheney was to Bush. Bannon is the Presidents brain. The new dark lord, the real power behind the throne.

  18. Tank boy
    Flame

    Poor Donnie

    Sorry Donnie, you didn't get to ban the muslims after all. I'd point out that those judges just made my America slightly safer by shutting down your fuckery, but you're too dumb to understand causational relationships and how the muslim extremists would use that ban to bolster recruitment. Read that again, you're too dumb. You're not just rolling dice in a game of Risk here, your actions have real consequences. Honestly, keep doing what you're doing. You'll fail bigly, you'll be impeached, and it will be even easier to keep Pence on a leash than your dumb ass.

    1. JeffyPoooh Silver badge
      Pint

      Re: Poor Donnie

      Tank boy posted, "...but you're too dumb..."

      Your correct spelling of "you're" and "too" is certain to cause confusion and consternation amongst the extreme right.

      Well played.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Shame on you all

    Trump is trying to make America great again and these unelected so called 'judges' are trying to ruin a nation and ruin his great works. You need to stop and ask yourself what their agenda actually is? Maybe these so called 'judges' should stick to enforcing the laws the President hands down to them, ether than trying to make them up. Remember a large majority of US citizens (I.e. the ones whose opinions matter) voted for him because they all knew Trump would deliver, whereas Obama just wanted to smile into the nearest camera and talk lots of hot air.

    And shame on you The Registrar. You used to be a fair to middling tech site, but now, like the rest of the media, you're acting childish because your third wave feminist narrative has been shown up for the rank hypocracy that it is. And you commenters. Stop having opinions that shame a nation. If any of you were brave you'd use your real names and post your home address too so we could all meet up for some reasoned discussion and a cup of tea. But no, you just want to be spiteful about President Trump and First Lady Melanoma. She is a credit to the nation, having been a lady wife to the great man for decades. Her clothes range keeps prosperous America looking beautiful and she must cry to listen to what you're saying about her husband.

    If any of he so called 'judges' are reading this: back off, let go. What do you know about the law anyway.

    1. sandman

      Re: Shame on you all

      Nice bit of satire there :-)

    2. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

      Re: Shame on you all

      Spectacular :-)

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Shame on you all

        "Spectacular :-)"

        But probably going over a few heads. It took Melanoma to make sure it landed right side up.

        1. Aladdin Sane Silver badge

          Re: Shame on you all

          Poe's law and all that.

        2. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

          Re: Shame on you all

          "It took Melanoma to make sure it landed right side up."

          That was when the penny dropped for me as well. Was getting all hot and bothered until I read that.

    3. Shades
      Trollface

      Re: Shame on you all

      "a cup of tea"

      They threw out all the tea, remember?

      1. Geoffrey W Silver badge

        Re: Shame on you all

        RE: "They threw out all the tea, remember?"

        That's why you can't get a decent cuppa in the states without importing something from the Pale Empire.

    4. creepy gecko
      Pint

      Re: Shame on you all

      Have an upvote and a beer. Like other commentards I was only 100% sure at "Melanoma". :-)

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: Shame on you all

        I'm still not 100% sure. One of my spleling check hers wants to change the name to Melanoma.

        1. agatum
          Thumb Up

          Re: Shame on you all

          One of my spleling check hers wants to change the name to Melanoma.

          'spleling check hers' vs 'spelling checkers'

          I see what you did there...

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Shame on you all

            I did wonder if I'd troweled it on a bit thick in the first few paragraphs...

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    To create a totalitarian or authoritarian regime first you must remove the checks and balances of democracy.

    How do you do that? If it was me I would undermine the legal system first then I would go for the legislative branch which is exactly what Trump is going for.

    In case you are wondering I live on an island in the pacific where I stroke my cat while I plan to take over the world, feel free to stop by and I'll happily tell you all my plans before I put you in a certain death situation that you will invariably escape from.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "To create a totalitarian or authoritarian regime first you must remove the checks and balances of democracy."

      First you push your powers to rule by decree - claiming you are obeying the will of the patriotic people who elected you. Then you appoint heads of executive branches who have espoused your views to make the country great again by any means. Add to your inner circle some powerful business owners who see a profit in the implementation.

      Renege on international agreements and blame other countries for your ills. Make vague threats of war to those who won't appease you. Accelerate a build up of your armed forces.

      Demonise minorities and any internal opposition. Falsely attribute any major incidents to a minority or the opposition. Make the media your censored mouthpiece for fake news.

      To get judicial things interpreted to your benefit - insert judges who know which side their bread is buttered. For those judges who are too principled and hold high positions - send the boys to suggest quietly that they should think about retiring to care for their loved ones.

      It has worked many times before.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "First you push your powers to rule by decree - claiming you are obeying the will of the patriotic people who elected you."

        First you push your powers to rule by decree - claiming you are obeying the will of the patriotic people who elected you. You proclaim that the country is under a great threat from outside.

        FTFM (viz edit)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          "First you push your powers to rule by decree - claiming you are obeying the will of the patriotic people who elected you. You proclaim that the country is under an immediate, existential threat from outside such that the only warning you'll get of them coming is the H-bomb detonated 20 miles over South Dakota to fry all the electricals; then all the immigrants who came in in the meantime will suddenly rise up and overpower everyone because they learned to live without electricity. Unless I have total and immediate power, America can DIE on a moment's notice and there'll be nothing you can do to stop it."

          There, FTFTFY. And yes, there really are people out there who honestly believe it.

    2. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge
      Coat

      I live on an island in the pacific where I stroke my cat while I plan to take over the world

      You can't be that bad - you like cats. Dog-lovers, on the other hand[1]..

      [1] OK, OK. So I has dog too. And dogs before. Lets just call it 'complex personality'..

  21. Chris Jasper

    So how long before a CIA run "Terrorist" attack on the US do we think?

    1. Mystic Megabyte Silver badge
      Pirate

      @chris jasper

      About a month :(

    2. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

      So how long before a CIA run "Terrorist" attack on the US do we think?

      You mean, like the fake ones that the FBI uses to entrap confused lower-intelligence people into so as to increase their appearance of Doing Stuff(tm)?

  22. Baldy50

    Nah!

    That was such a contradictory post that one of mine, what was I thinking of? Oh! I remember, wind the bleating heart lefties up, that was it!

    1. sandman

      Re: Nah!

      That should be "bleeding heart", personally mine doesn't have vocal chords, so "bleating" would be tricky.

    2. sabroni Silver badge

      Re: wind the bleating heart lefties up

      Ba-a-ah!

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: wind the bleating heart lefties up

        Well, it IS lambing season ... Nearly over now, thankfully.

  23. hoola

    Any other country???

    Presumably then if the ban had been on any other, predominantly white, non-Muslim country it would have been fine. All the focus appears to be the fact that these are Muslim countries.

    Bunch of total hypocrites!

    1. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      Re: Any other country???

      Well, no, I think any blanket ban that discriminates against any group and is unfair, especially where a greater good cannot be demonstrated (as opposed to speculated) would have been opposed. If Trump had tried to block all Christians from South America (but letting in the atheists from those countries), it would still be wrong and would still be opposed.

      1. Richard Plinston Silver badge

        Re: Any other country???

        > If Trump had tried to block all Christians from South America (but letting in the atheists from those countries), it would still be wrong and would still be opposed.

        http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-nobody-except-me-gets-to-question-someone-elses-religion/

      2. Hey Nonny Nonny Mouse

        Re: Any other country???

        His own website states he wanted a Muslim Immigration ban.

        https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-on-preventing-muslim-immigration

        He stated it while on the campaign trail as well.

        Want to try and deny it's a ban on Muslims again?

        Just because it's been renamed and had the word Muslim removed does not mean it's a different ban.

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Oh dear...

    ... the liberal left walked right into this one and shot their feet off.

    By appearing not to care about the security of the US the liberal left have left themselves wide open to having everything that even appears to attack the country or its people laid on them - 'see what happens when you let the left have control'.

    Doing this also consolidates Trump's position with those the left hates and puts him in a much stronger position for a second term, but then it appears the left isn't noted for thinking only emoting.

    1. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      Re: Oh dear...

      Liberal Americans -- why would they care less about the security of their country? I think anyone concerned with American security would first ensure that nobody came from any country that actually had delivered terrorists onto American soil. That would be Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Russia (which contains Chechnya, which supplied the Boston bombers), to name a few. But these countries have not been blocked.

      And why can't security be create through laws coming from Congress? The PATRIOT Act etc have shown that the Govt are willing to act broadly and swiftly. I can't understand why, with a Republican House and a Republican President, the conservatives don't trust the American system that is supposed to be better than any other country's.

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Oh dear...

        Why doesn't the US look at ITSELF as well, since at least two known terrorist attacks were entirely domestic in nature, including the perpetrators?

      2. Richard Plinston Silver badge

        Re: Oh dear...

        > That would be Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Russia (which contains Chechnya, which supplied the Boston bombers), to name a few. But these countries have not been blocked.

        That is because Trump has business in those countries.

    2. tekHedd

      "Liberal"

      I'm getting really tired of trump supporters assuming all opposition comes from "liberals." As if "being liberal" is a prerequisite for "wanting good government". I'm twice as conservative as most of these "conservative" trumpites, who seem perfectly fine with big government as long as it also forwards their personal agendas.

      By not caring about constitutional checks and balances, trump supporters have left themselves wide open to... oppression. One word. No additional verbage needed.

  25. sandman

    It's all a media conspiracy!

    Damn, should have put that all in CAPS! I'd like to thank the Illuminati who obviously control the media for secretly supporting Trump. Look at CNN's ratings, the massive spike in New York Times sales, etc, since he was elected. You might think his tweets criticizing them are sincere - not so, he's being played like the sock puppet he is.

    It's also given the rest of the world a chance to both laugh at and feel superior to the United States - not something that happens very often. The rest of the world's media are raking it in. there's never been a better time to be a satirist or cartoonist, petition sites are booming and every second social media post includes the word Trump.

    I rest my case your Honour (ps, please don't send it to appeal).

    1. genghis_uk

      Re: It's all a media conspiracy!

      <It's also given the rest of the world a chance to both laugh at and feel superior to the United States - not something that happens very often.>

      Actually we do it all the time but we have not had this level of pantomime for a long time... Ronald (the president's brain is missing) Regan and Dubya were great for the satirists but Trump...? Comedians are going to have material for years with this one.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It's all a media conspiracy!

        "Comedians are going to have material for years with this one."

        South Park say they will not be satirising Trump. They just can't compete with Trump.

        See interview video

        Not sure what they'll do if when Sarah Palin becomes the ambassador to Canada.

        1. Lars Silver badge

          Re: It's all a media conspiracy!

          I wouldn't worry about Sarah Palin. Was anybody ever angry about her, surprised yes, as a possible vice president. But seriously we laugh at Larel and Hardy and similar while we know they play "stupid", Sarah on the other hand does not play, she is totally genuine.

        2. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: It's all a media conspiracy!

          "Not sure what they'll do if when Sarah Palin becomes the ambassador to Canada."

          Declare her persona non grata and send her home?

  26. Dwarf Silver badge

    Summary

    Person who does not get legal checks and balances then looses when its challenged responds by threatening those who do understand the process with the very same process..

    What a moron.

    1. Truckle The Uncivil

      Re: Summary

      A moron with the nuclear codes. A moron subject to pique. A White House that wants war. Fear.

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Now we can expect to see the ban in 16 Islamic states on Israeli citizens lifted soon too...

    1. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      What?

      Shall the United States take pointers from Israel or any other nation? If a country is doing a wrong thing, should the USA follow suit?

  28. Nathan 13

    Just one small thing

    Its not a muslim ban.

    1. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      Re: Just one small thing

      It is a ban of people who come from certain countries as long as they are not any faith but one. Nobody is saying Trump is banning all Muslims from anywhere. And the security forces seem to be interpreting this as an all-out ban, e.g. that Canadian who was born in Morocco who was trying to visit family in the USA and got stopped, and had her phone scanned, because she was Muslim. That is a de facto Muslim ban, albeit haphazardly applied.

    2. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

      Re: Just one small thing

      It is though, isn't it.

      Obvious unless you're blind, deaf, dumb and have the intellectual capacity of a coconut. A Trump supporter, in other words.

      1. jonsnow91

        Re: Just one small thing

        That's just disrespectful.

        I bet you feel like a big man running around shouting names at people who don't agree with you.

        Instead all you prove is how ridiculously stupid you are... please continue, I insist.

        The more and more you try and take some kind of high ground on others, more will turn against you because... well... your a prick.

        1. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

          Re: Just one small thing

          *you're

      2. Bill_Sticker

        Re: Just one small thing

        All Trump has done is to repeat the actions of Clinton, Bush and Obama with this 90 day travel ban on seven specific countries (Specified by the Obama administration) which are either failed states or openly hostile to the USA. It is emphatically not a 'Muslim Ban' and it is both misleading and disingenuous to report it as such. The fact that they are majority Muslim countries doesn't affect the visa suspension for those citizens who are not Muslim.

        The blinkered and partisan can downvote this post all they like, but it won't change the fact that a similar visa suspension under the Obama administration lasted for eleven months, not the 90 day suspension Trump has tried to put in place. The UAE (A Muslim country) also have a similar travel ban. Where was the self-righteous outcry against those? *Crickets*

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Just one small thing

      Without wishing to upset anyone can I point out that not only did he ban those countries but he actively supported minority religions entering the USA. Now I'm guessing these minorities are not going to be trying to escape from Western countries which means non-Muslims. Therefore I think the general consensus is that Trump is anti-Muslim.

      A potato is a potato no matter how you pronouce it. You say potato, I say potato, trump tells the Muslims to f*** off.

  29. creepy gecko

    One view of the 9th Circuit's opinion...

    https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-read-and-how-not-read-todays-9th-circuit-opinion

    I don't see how Trump's case can succeed at the Supreme Court; but there again I didn't think Trump had any chance of getting elected POTUS, so what do I know?

  30. mickaroo

    ROFL

    I believe I shall cease watching/reading/listening to broadcast news about THE DONALD, and just get all my DONALD news from The Reg Comments section whenever there is a DONALD article.

    So much more fun than ABC, BBC, CBC ... NBC ... XYZBC.

  31. 2StrokeRider

    Another factually challenged 'journalist' with an axe to grind. This Reg hack, like some others, ignores facts because they don't fit the narrative. Agree or disagree on the 7 country ban, but at least be factual.

    "However, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest used publicly available information and identified at least 17 individuals from these seven nations that from March 2014 to June 2016 were implicated in terrorism. Eight of these are terrorists convicted for crimes mainly related to giving material support or attempting to give material support to ISIS."

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/30/at-least-20-alleged-terrorists-since-2014-came-from-countries-affected-by-trumps-immigration-ban/

    1. Lord Elpuss Silver badge

      Hmm, good old dailycaller.com. Reputable reference site there, but if it's all the same to you I'll go with people who actually know what they're talking about. Y'know, like four Federal judges.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "The Daily Caller is a conservative news and opinion website "

      "The Daily Caller takes a denialist stance about global warming"

      "The site has stories that basically deliver a message, black people/gay people/insert-outgroup-here evil. "

      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Daily_Caller

    3. Alister Silver badge

      "However, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest used publicly available information and identified at least 17 individuals from these seven nations that from March 2014 to June 2016 were implicated in terrorism.

      Wow, 17 whole people from 7 different nations.

      How about this then:

      http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7613/CBP-7613.pdf

      In Great Britain, between 11 September 2001 and 31 December 2015, 656 individuals were prosecuted for terrorist offences, 542 of whom were convicted.

      That's a mean of roughly 38 a year, from one country.

      So maybe the UK should be added to the immigration ban as well?

    4. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      Even if it were true...

      ...it does mean that those who managed to slip into the USA were caught. Which means your security services are doing their job. Terrorists are not superhumanly smart. You have the NSA and the CIA and the FBI. Do you think they are all so incompetent that only closing your borders will make you safe? The two chaps in Bowling Green were noted as they came in, had an eye kept on them and, as soon as they actually did something, were dealt with. No excessive force, no excessive reaction, simply sensible watchfulness and sensible actions.

      But perhaps it is more exciting to think that diabolically clever and cunning evilness is threatening the USA from every corner and only S.H.I.E.L.D.-like reactions can save you all, and that every effort you make is somehow heroic.

      1. Shades

        Re: Even if it were true...

        #BowlingGreenMassacre #NeverForget

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Even if it were true...

          How long until trumpites came with #BuenosAiresMeteorAttack #NeverForget ?

    5. Kevin 6

      RE: 2strokeRider

      "Another factually challenged 'journalist' with an axe to grind. This Reg hack, like some others, ignores facts because they don't fit the narrative. Agree or disagree on the 7 country ban, but at least be factual."

      Honestly this is why I barely even read this site anymore in all honesty it reads more like some shoddy tabloid now.

  32. jonsnow91

    I hate to inform all the liberal minded fools but your cell operatives are highlighting their allegiance. ...this will result in them being replaced (directly or indirectly) and 2 years down the line all the liberal fools will have been replaced with Trumps warriors and Trump will get anything he desires. ...clearly POTUS is not the most powerful position in the world if your own people can undermine your decisions ...it is clearly obvious that Putin is probably the most powerful person in the world ...because his followers and his citizens adore him / accept him, unlike America, which is a cluster-f*ck of hypocrisy.

    1. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

      "I hate to inform all the liberal minded fools"

      You're not informing many people, you know.

    2. Alien8n Silver badge

      "Putin is probably the most powerful person in the world ...because his followers and his citizens adore him / accept him"

      Actually I think you'll find they realise that those who oppose him have an unusually high mortality rate.

    3. Tom 38 Silver badge
      Joke

      I hate to inform all the liberal minded fools but your cell operatives are highlighting their allegiance. ...this will result in them being replaced (directly or indirectly) and 2 years down the line all the liberal fools will have been replaced with Trumps warriors and Trump will get anything he desires.

      That's just disrespectful.

      I bet you feel like a big man running around shouting names at people who don't agree with you.

      Instead all you prove is how ridiculously stupid you are... please continue, I insist.

      The more and more you try and take some kind of high ground on others, more will turn against you because... well... your[sic] a prick.

      Irony - adj. a bit like iron.

    4. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      Not looking for a 'most powerful person in the world'

      The days of Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan are long over and not lamented. The world history of strong men dominating others is not a happy one. Can we perhaps grow up and stop looking for a super-hero and just get on with talking and negotiating and all of that? There is no such thing as a saviour.

  33. Haku

    *grabs popcorn*

    Ahh, today's tantrump episode to muse over.

    I'm gonna get fat from all this popcorn if he carries on like this for the next 4 years :(

    1. Stoneshop Silver badge

      Re: *grabs popcorn*

      I'm gonna get fat from all this popcorn

      Just switch to microwave popcorn, and don't add butter.

  34. davidp231

    President Trump has suffered a serious blow to his authority

    "I am the President, and you WILL respect my AUTHORITAH!"

  35. WibbleMe

    What has this reporting got to do with an IT related issue

    1. John H Woods Silver badge

      "What has this reporting got to do with an IT related issue" --- WibbleMe

      It's about a Tweet.

  36. Paul 135

    What has this got to do with IT or technology? All such articles are doing are devaluing The Register and placing it as just another axis of the untrustworthy, out-of-touch, looney libtard media.

    1. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      So up until now...

      ...you've been happy with the reporters and with your fellow Commentards, but as soon as we move onto this new topic, we are suddenly untrustworthy out-of-touch, and stupid. Perhaps, on balance, it turns out that techies are skeptical, don't like bullshit, are suspicious of self-appointed saviors, and are intolerant of bombast? Seems to me we're pretty consistent, whether it is Apple or Microsoft or Trump.

  37. Jonathon Green
    Trollface

    I like Americans...

    ...they're funny.

    1. Lars Silver badge
      Happy

      Re: I like Americans...

      So do I, but now let me revel something very funny, I know more twats where I live than American twats, And I hope you will understand that without first studying statistics and logic. It just happens that I don't find Trump suited to be the president of any country regardless of him being black yellow pink Muslim Jew or an Eskimo.

      I have both studied and worked abroad and travelled in more than fifty countries and you meet people you like, people you agree with and at times you rather change table or topic and it would not surprise me if there are more twats in the USA than in say Greenland.

      Lets not dive into that black hole where all logic and humanity disappears and we start to hate people for no reason, out of fear.

  38. JaitcH
    Happy

    Some so-called President

    Judges are human and they read / listen to the news.

    For this so-called president to have Twittered away negatively just demonstrates his immaturity.

    This undoubtedly spurred the Appeals Court to work overtime and really issue a Decision that the so-called president would have a hard time fighting in the superior courts.

  39. Marty McFly

    Trump is a racist!!!

    On January 20th he personally kicked a black family out of government provided housing they had lived in for 8 years. It was on the news. He personally escorted them out and had government transportation haul them away.

    1. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      Re: Trump is a racist!!!

      Humour?

  40. MatsSvensson

    Heil to the chimp.

  41. John 104

    Overturned

    It will be reinstated. As much as the 9th circuit court, and the people who hate anything Trump does want it to be different, you can't just piss on the constitution. The constitution gives POTUS the authority to do what he did. Period. The stay and the current ruling are blatant overreach by the judicial branch. their job is NOT to create or interpret policy. Don't like it? Change the constitution. That's how it works. But be careful... Changes you make today because you don't like the current president will affect future ones as well.

    The sad thing is this: everything Obama did was lauded as amazing and wonderful by the left. We know this not to be true, but he could do no wrong according to the media party. Now, everything that Trump does will be racist, evil, whatever. Whether it is good or bad. Its a shame, really. It is only going to get worse for this country no matter what party is in control. Our governance is more and more like a reality TV show and less and less like it should be. For the people, by the people.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Overturned

      "The constitution gives POTUS the authority to do what he did. Period."

      Please cite the exact text of the Constitution where this is stated, then. Please note, also, that the Bill of Rights (where discrimination against religion is forbidden) was ratified AFTER the original Article II, therefore anything it says takes precedence as official Amendments.

      And don't give us that bit about national security because if that were true, Saudi Arabia would be on that list (since the 9/11 hijackers and the Al Queda mastermind all came from there). Also the US would be banning ITSELF since homegrown terrorists have committed atrocities as well (Oklahoma City in particular).

      1. creepy gecko
        Facepalm

        Re: Overturned

        Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber" is a Brit.

        Perhaps with that fact in mind Trump should have included the UK as an eighth country on his Executive Order. That would make more sense than his current list of seven.

        I'm sure Donald thinks his first three weeks in office have gone very well...

    2. tekHedd

      Re: Overturned

      "everything Obama did was lauded as amazing and wonderful by the left"

      OK, the rest of the comment aside, this is actually relevant. The Democratic party's largely unquestioning support of Obama has indeed been disturbing. One good thing about Trump's election is that now it is socially acceptable for people on the left to express discontent with abuses of executive power, whereas previously there was largely a dead silence when Obama would, say, ratify domestic spying powers or whatever. Criticism of drone bombings has been very quiet and reasoned; "Oh that was rude, they really should be more careful which buildings they blow up." Imagine if Trump drone-bombed the wrong target.

      So, in one small way, Trump's election is a positive, because people should be outraged. My question is: how the heck does this add up to a defense of Trump? It doesn't. So now we have a mirror reaction from the far right, who seem totally OK with the same "crimes" Obama committed being perpetrated by Trump.

      Basically, I'm surrounded by idiots. I don't know if we deserve what's coming, but we certainly asked for it.

  42. Nocroman

    Failure of our courts

    If our judges fail to uphold the constitutional laws our representatives have enacted in our names. Then they should be removed from the bench and never be allowed to serve in public office again.

    " Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

    This is the law whether those that refuse to work and oppose The President of the United States of America. Protesting in America is a right of the people. Sedition is not.

    Judges saying no unrepairable damage has been done by the immigrants and illegal aliens should have their heads pulled out of their asses so they can .look around and see the permanent damage done to woman that have been raped, men and woman that have been beaten and killed by Individuals let into our country from the nations included in the ban. This veteran did not fight in service of this country to let a bunch of morons allow people that have sworn to kill Americans and take over this country into our country. Too many of our young citizens have been brainwashed by their tactics to fight against our own country. Too many mosques have been found containing weapons for was within them. Too many Muslim leaders (already in this country) have stood up and spoken (which is their right) and encourage those of the Muslim faith to do everything they can to take over and destroy the American way of life and our country. Irreparable damage has already been done to The USA.

    Once again I have to stand up and fight against the enemies, both foreign and DOMESTIC that are attacking our nation from within. Every patriotic American citizen and veteran should be doing the same.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Failure of our courts

      "If our judges fail to uphold the constitutional laws our representatives have enacted in our names. Then they should be removed from the bench and never be allowed to serve in public office again."

      Then convince your Congressman to impeach them.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Failure of our courts

      Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952

      It appears that Act has been amended a number of times, including to make it less discriminatory. Just because that is what the Act says does not mean that all its provisions still apply, or in their original form.

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Failure of our courts

        "Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952."

        An Act of Congress. Therefore, subject to be overruled by the First Amendment.

    3. ShadowDragon8685

      Re: Failure of our courts

      You're a disgrace to the nation, please fire yourself as an American immediately.

      We've done that whole "Discriminating against others based on race/ethnicity/culture" in the past. That was when we established concentration camps for Japanese-Americans out of the terrifying fear that the slant-eyed yellow bastards would all draw swords from thin air, shout BANZAI and start slaughtering people.

      Guess what? Statistically speaking, not a single one of them had any love for Hirohito or the Imperial Japanese government.

      Meanwhile, a truly alarming number of German-American citizens were staging outright Nazi-sympathizing rallies and establishing an American Nazi Party, and we certainly didn't do anything to them because they were white Christians who looked like the average guy next door.

      People like you, and Trump, are a disgrace to this country. You want to make America great again? Start by disenfranchising yourself.

  43. Mikel

    The man is a gift

    To late night comedians everywhere.

    1. Richard Plinston Silver badge

      Re: The man is a gift

      > To late night comedians everywhere.

      OTOH, Barnum and Bailey Circus is closing because it simply can't compete.

  44. steve 124

    as is usual in Trump article comments here...

    So many twats commenting on things they don't understand that I won't post this as a reply to any single one (consider it a reply to all of you).

    I keep seeing "to within the restraints of the law". Let me tell you what the Constitution says (I believe that counts as "the law")...

    Section 1182(f), which states: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate”

    Where in that is there any confusion as to whether or not he has the legal leg to stand on?

    As for "no syrians have been convicted of terrorists attacks in America" how about that little attack on Paris back in 2015? Do we have to wait until that happens here before we act? That's just foolish. If Martians were attacking European capitals would we need to wait until it happens to ours before we decide to do something?

    It blows my mind that this is even an issue. It's so obvious that this is simply the left doing anything it can to "obstruct" and "confuse" the American people using it's only tools remaining. They still control the media and the legislative branch (due to years of leftist appointees that never come up for renewal once appointed).

    I think any judge involved in this obstruction should be immediately reviewed for disbarment and / or impeachment for interfering with the function of the U.S. Federal government and usurping the Article 1 constitutional powers of Congress to regulate commerce with foreign countries and set the rules of naturalization and immigration, and the President’s Article 2 powers as Commander in Chief and the sole officer responsible for interaction with foreign powers.

    The swamp is wide and deep. We need to get rid of quite of few of these judging nitwits that believe they are the voice of a higher power. You're just a lawyer without a boss. Your boss is supposed to be the SCOTUS, but since you're ignoring the 1936 and 1948 SCOTUS judgements that already settled this and established the POTUS has this authority, if I were your boss I'd fire your ass on the spot.

    This EO WILL be allowed and I hope Trumps team is making a list of those who tried to stop it. I'd love to see some of these embedded traitors strung up on their own noose.

    Just a patriotic American's viewpoint.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: as is usual in Trump article comments here...

      Minor point: Section 1182(f) is not actually in the constitution....But, what do I know? I just believe in treating people like humans.

      Just a patriotic American and human's viewpoint.

      1. steve 124

        Re: as is usual in Trump article comments here...

        Technically correct, in that an ‘act’ refers to laws passed by the Congress. Hence the constitution does not contain acts (they are used to enforce provisions in the constitution). I think 1182(f) is pretty clear and is still a "law" backed by the constitutional powers it clarifies.

        Next time, post your name instead of as an Anonymous Coward, if you want to be treated as a human.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: as is usual in Trump article comments here...

          Trouble is, Acts ate subject to Constitutional scrutiny. The ban on religious discrimination is in the First Amendment, part of the Constitution itself and therefore takes precedence.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: as is usual in Trump article comments here...

          <i>Next time, post your name instead of as an Anonymous Coward, if you want to be treated as a human.</i>

          That from "steve 124".....

          I'd rather post as an anonymous coward, thank you. Sorry if this bother people with thin skins and wee little hands.

    2. Rafael #872397

      Re: as is usual in Trump article comments here...

      Constitution says ... Section 1182(f)

      Wow, that's a yuuuge constitution. The best ever!

    3. Cereberus

      Re: as is usual in Trump article comments here...

      Steve 124 - you asked:

      Section 1182(f), which states: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate”

      Where in that is there any confusion as to whether or not he has the legal leg to stand on?

      The pertinent section here is 'would be detrimental to the interests of the United States'.

      Herein lies the reason for Donald to hop around because his legal leg has been removed. What grounds are there to ban these specific countries when there are so many more that have not only threatened but made good on those threats - Saudi Arabia and all the rest mentioned previously, including the UK. If the ban is because they would be detrimental then where is the proof, and why such a selective group of people?

      You could also look at your internal right to bear arms. After all that hasn't inspired terror with how many people killed by guns each year - not even having to go into the atrocities where children get killed, but that's OK so long as you still have the right to inspire terror at whim by deciding to go to a school and terrorize everyone by shooting people at random - it's in the constitution.

      Ultimately it was a badly thought out, badly imposed EO. Why can't you people just admit that and sort it out. If you want to ban people with justification that is your right, but that justification should be imposed evenly, not just as a means of grabbing a headline then whining because Trumpy boy isn't getting his own way, and it's not fair.

      Here's a thought - why not use that massive multi group intelligence set up you have to target those people who may be a problem and just ban them. Of course you might actually have to have some intelligence in your intelligence services rather than just blanket ban a large number of people for the hell of it. But if you used that intelligence you might actually have some support for it, especially if you let the people implementing it know exactly what you want to do rather than leave them to try and work it out for themselves with the resulting chaos it causes.

      America - land of the free, home of the brave - the only country to actually have sarcasm in it's national anthem.

  45. RonWheeler

    Cognitive dissonance

    Clearly is a thing.

  46. AndyD 8-)&#8377;

    8USC1182

    It seems that you can still be refused entry to the USA if "you are or have ever been a member of the Communist Party".

    I didn't know that, and find it rather shocking.

    1. Steve Todd

      Re: 8USC1182

      You CAN, but may not be banned from entry if you've ever committed acts of genocide. US emigration are a weird lot.

  47. Baldy50

    LOL.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/dominican-paper-runs-photo-alec-baldwin-trump-45431936

    He does do a very good impression!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019