You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: WoT
Donald Trump says he would ban Afghan and Pakistani immigrants from US
2016-06-15
[Khaama (Afghanistan)] Following a deadly attack on a gay nightclub in Florida, the US Presidential candidate Donald Trump has said he would ban the immigrants colonists from Afghanistan, Pakistain, and Syria.

He was speaking a day after an ISIS sympathizer killed at least 50 people by attacking the night club in Florida.

Trump said he would use the executive authority of the presidency to temporarily ban the entry of foreign Moslems from countries "where there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe, or our allies until we fully understand how to end these threats."

He also added that the immigration ban would would last until "we are in a position to properly screen these people coming into our country. They’re pouring in, and we don’t know what we’re doing."

According to Trump, the parents of the Florida gunman, Omar Mateen, 29, were born in Afghanistan while the parents of last year’s San Bernardino shooter, also an IS sympathizer, were from Pakistain while his wife and co-shooter was from Soddy Arabia
...a kingdom taking up the bulk of the Arabian peninsula. Its primary economic activity involves exporting oil and soaking Islamic rubes on the annual hajj pilgrimage. The country supports a large number of princes in whatcha might call princely splendor. When the oil runs out the rest of the world is going to kick sand in the Soddy national face...
Trump indicated that all of those countries -- which are allies of the United States -- would be subject to his proposed immigration ban.

"Immigration from Afghanistan into the United States has increased nearly five-fold in just one year. According to Pew Research, 99 percent of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Shari’a law," he added.

He said "We admit many more from other countries in the region who share these same oppressive views. If we want to remain a free and open society, then we have to control our borders."

Posted by:Fred

#31  Google Laureate International Universities (Formerly Sylvan Learning Centers) and Bill Clinton Foundation. Clinton got $16.5 million for some BS honorary chancellor's job. About the time Bill got appointed, Hillary as SoS made Laureate part of her Global Partnership in the DoS. Check Swhweizer's Clinton Cash--Chapter 7. The Clinton Foundation has done very little charitable work. Bill, Hillary and Chelsey seems to have benefitted the most in what seems to be a series of quid pro Quo relationship with other countries and individuals. Much of it is hard to prove but then again legal authorities have not taken a hard look. The Clinton Foundation is probably as big a scandal as Hillary's emails--probably the two are entwined. It will be interesting to see if the FBI comes up with anything. If one starts to look at all the left wing organizations and individuals and the Clintons and it is like a frigging octopus--lots of connecting tentacles.
Posted by: JohnQC   2016-06-15 22:24  

#30  I keep telling you the republic is long over. It's an oligarchy. You pick which SOB is going to be your patron or just roll over and die at the hands of the other faction, speed is variable but the end is inevitable if you just wash your hands of it all.
You got this because the 'opposition' really isn't and hasn't been for a while. The 'opposition' brought this on itself and us because it was deaf and already bought.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2016-06-15 22:22  

#29  "... it begins to look like a setup ala Michele Fields..."

Trump botched the handling of Fields. It doesn't matter whether it was or wasn't a "flop" on her part. Your team says "Sorry, Miss" and everybody moves on. Instead he took unnecessary heat for nothing.

Between "conservatives" pretending they might vote Hillary and "conservatives" bringing up *badly* handled incidents from MONTHS ago, Trump certainly has his work cut out for him.
Posted by: Crusader   2016-06-15 22:04  

#28  The judge may not be legally required to recuse himself but if you look into La Raza the decision to appoint him to the bench in the first place appears sketchy. IIRC it was Obama who appointed the guy.

And then there is this:

Law Firm Behind Trump University Lawsuit Gave Big Money to the Clintons.

You put two and two together and it begins to look like a setup ala Michele Fields. Funny timing too...just before the election. Hmmmm.

Now, let's not get into the subject of Bill Clinton taking kickbacks from another scam university. I don't have time this afternoon.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2016-06-15 17:53  

#27  This link: https://popehat.com/2016/06/06/lawsplainer-when-must-federal-judges-recuse-themselves-anyway/
Posted by: Crusader   2016-06-15 16:31  

#26  Re: 24

It doesn't matter that the Judge is a member of that legal organization, the article you provided even admits that "...Though the California organization is not officially affiliated with National Council of La Raza..."

There is a great explanation of why the judge isn't required to recuse himself at this link:

Posted by: Crusader   2016-06-15 16:30  

#25  Most people will spend less than 90 seconds deciding whom to vote for. Most of those people have already decided.
Posted by: Iblis   2016-06-15 16:21  

#24  Thanks for that link, ZF. I looked at it and, in typical WAPO/MSM style, it is long on verbiage and short on facts. Yes, yes, it quotes a lot of people saying a lot of bad things about Trump but the case is still in litigation and I'll wait for the final judgement. There is no doubt, of course, that the mainstream media is in a full court press about what a horrible scam the university was.
You have to dig a little deeper to find this:

Judge in Trump University Case Tied to Radical La Raza Organization

or this:

Earlier this month, a group of senators sent a letter to Inspector General Kathleen Tighe raising concerns that the Dept. of Education’s probe into its student loans servicer’s compliance with the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) was riddled with problems.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2016-06-15 16:19  

#23  Sorry, but its silly to pretend that women will be coming out in droves to vote for Hillary--she's not liked by them in any more significant numbers than she is any other demographic. The (D) party voters will turn out because she has a (D) next to her name, but nobody seriously goes to sleep at night pretending that Hillary is a magical champion of women.
Posted by: Crusader   2016-06-15 15:40  

#22  So, you're just a Puritan, ZF?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2016-06-15 14:57  

#21  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-said-university-was-all-about-education-actually-its-goal-was-sell-sell-sell/2016/06/04/5b6545d0-2819-11e6-ae4a-3cdd5fe74204_story.html

I doubt you'll get much out of it. If you don't consider the fact that he's a csaino operator makes him sleazy (along with other GOP benefactors like Steve Wynn and Sheldon Adelson), then very little will change your mind. Not criminal - sleazy.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2016-06-15 14:54  

#20  ZF, gives us an example?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2016-06-15 14:40  

#19  People call Trump a lot of different names; Hitler, Nazi, jerk, scumbag, racist, etc., etc. I've heard it all. What I have not heard are the facts to back up these assertions.

That's because you have to read long articles to get at those facts. Some people don't have the patience. To each his own.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2016-06-15 14:29  

#18  People call Trump a lot of different names; Hitler, Nazi, jerk, scumbag, racist, etc., etc. I've heard it all. What I have not heard are the facts to back up these assertions.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2016-06-15 14:26  

#17  The major problem with Trump is that he'll depress GOP and conservative turnout in a year that women voters will be out in force to put one of their own in the White House. The resulting blowout could make the Obama victory in 2008 look like a close election. If he doesn't do whatever it takes to get endorsements from GOP pols, he will be remembered as a modern-day Barry Goldwater, reborn as a sleazy, compulsive liar.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2016-06-15 13:56  

#16  Even if he was a bigger scumbag than Hillary (unsure - but it's close), at least the press and the rest of the political system would provide some opposition to his abuses. I do not see that as the case if Clinton is President. In any case it will be interesting to see who the candidates select for the VP slot - someone their worst/most violent enemies hate or fear more than them?

At this stage I don't give a damn if he abuses his power in favor of right wing interests. What I fear is that he'll do it for left wing interests (i.e. a gun ban, with Democrats in tow) or for his personal pecuniary interests, thereby tarnishing the GOP brand for decades. I was against Trump as the nominee because he's always struck me as being too self-interested. But now that he is, I'll hold my nose to vote for him. But the fact is that most people who are repelled by this man will just save themselves a half-hour wait at the local poll location and experience a frisson of self-satisfaction from the look on Trump's face as he gets shellacked at the polls. I know that'll be my consolation prize.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2016-06-15 13:43  

#15  The average voter will just see a scumbag

I believe what the average voter sees is "somebody who tells it as it is"
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2016-06-15 13:35  

#14  Hillary is a liberal who cuts corners.

Just like Josef Stalin.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2016-06-15 13:32  

#13  Note that I see Trump as a scumbag, but my scumbag, because I follow politics closely. The average voter will just see a scumbag.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2016-06-15 13:32  

#12  Bigger scumbag than Hillary?

Not even close. Trump operated csainos. This is essentially legal drug dealing - taking money from rubes and compulsive gamblers. It's legal, but definitely not ethical. Then there's the vtiamin scam and Trump U. Hillary is a liberal who cuts corners.

I've been following his antics since the 80's, and I've never thought he was a good person. I support Trump despite hating his guts because we have common goals (at least if he's being truthful about supporting conservative positions). However, I have no illusions about this sleazebag. He is who he is - the scum of the earth, as non-criminals go.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2016-06-15 13:29  

#11  Even if he was a bigger scumbag than Hillary (unsure - but it's close), at least the press and the rest of the political system would provide some opposition to his abuses. I do not see that as the case if Clinton is President. In any case it will be interesting to see who the candidates select for the VP slot - someone their worst/most violent enemies hate or fear more than them?
Posted by: Glenmore   2016-06-15 12:59  

#10  Bigger scumbag than Hillary?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2016-06-15 12:54  

#9  OK. I'm a rube. I want a wall. I wanted one even before Trump did. I do not believe I'm a racist just because I want to keep drugs and criminals out of my country. I want to keep Muslims out of my country. I said so before Trump did. That's because Islam is not compatible with Western Civilization and I happen to enjoy Western Civilization. Is Trump brash, arrogant, vulgar, loud and crude? Yeah. I wish he was as classy as Reagan. But I'll take what I can get.

I agree with Trump on most of the conservative things he's said. The problem is that he's also said a lot of liberal things. But the principal reason he was at the bottom of my list of GOP candidates was the fact he is a scumbag in his personal and business conduct, and this kind of stuff comes out in political campaigns. He is unelectable in the general. Most people are not political junkies (i.e. caucus/primary voters). It matters whether someone is a scumbag. The GOP is on the verge of being crushed in November because we nominated a scumbag to be our Presidential candidate. I suppose it's a cleansing process. Primary voters need to be reminded every so often that electability is important.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2016-06-15 12:53  

#8  OK. I'm a rube. I want a wall. I wanted one even before Trump did. I do not believe I'm a racist just because I want to keep drugs and criminals out of my country. I want to keep Muslims out of my country. I said so before Trump did. That's because Islam is not compatible with Western Civilization and I happen to enjoy Western Civilization. Is Trump brash, arrogant, vulgar, loud and crude? Yeah. I wish he was as classy as Reagan. But I'll take what I can get.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2016-06-15 12:39  

#7  He's also come out for more gun control.
Posted by: Iblis   2016-06-15 12:24  

#6  Geeze folks...don't get so defensive. I was just pointing out that Trump is full of shit and the people that bought into his most provocative proposals are a bunch simple rubes.
Posted by: DepotGuy   2016-06-15 12:24  

#5  Hold on here now. Trump's original proposal was a travel ban on ALL Muslims. What next...a call for enhanced border security instead of the Great Wall of Trump? Friggin Poesour.

Think John Gotti vs Osama bin Laden. Not because Clinton is Osama bin Laden, but because she will probably let in enough Muslims for a thousand bin Laden to grow up on American soil.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2016-06-15 11:54  

#4  Hold on here now. Trump's original proposal was a travel ban on ALL Muslims. What next...a call for enhanced border security instead of the Great Wall of Trump? Friggin Poesour.

I happen to think Trump is a despicable and untrustworthy major league slimeball. But he might overturn some of Obama's policies. The alternative is Hillary, whose victory would extend Obama's policies for a third term. He might be a scumbag, but he might be our scumbag.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2016-06-15 11:50  

#3  Yes, DepotGuy. The primaries are over and Trump won. He kicked Bush's ass. He kicked Marco's butt and he did the same for Cruz and Kasich. He has roused his base. But now he's campaigning for the general election and apparently there are people in this country who are so inhibited by the cult of political correctness that Trump now feels the need to sound more "presidential". Anybody who knows anything understood all along that his proposals would have to be tempered by layers of lawyers and politicians. But he's the same guy and his policies will have the same effect, which we desperately need.

What? You want more Pakis and Afghans coming to America? More Syrians and Nigerians? More Yemenis and Somalis? You want more massacres? Didn't think so.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2016-06-15 11:48  

#2  Hold on here now. Trump's original proposal was a travel ban on ALL Muslims. What next...a call for enhanced border security instead of the Great Wall of Trump? Friggin Poesour.
Posted by: DepotGuy   2016-06-15 09:42  

#1  That should open some cab and quickie-mart jobs.
Posted by: Skidmark   2016-06-15 07:25  

00:00