Jeff Sessions Dismisses Hawaii as ‘an Island in the Pacific’

[yuna628 9,990]

42 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

typical maneuver from a racist "twas a joke, can't you find it funny"

Well now I do declare don't be too hard on ol' Jeffy. We can't expect someone from a former Spanish-owned landmass, and confederate rogue nation, to understand the logistics of the rest of the states and actually represent all of them instead of their own motivations.

 

Totally a joke right?

Edited April 25, 2017 by yuna628

[smilesammich 10,727]

8 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Well now I do declare don't be too hard on ol' Jeffy. We can't expect someone from a former Spanish-owned landmass, and confederate rogue nation, to understand the logistics of the rest of the states and actually represent all of them instead of their own motivations.

 

Totally a joke right?

totally. but on a serious note how does one crazy hawaiian 'federal' judge totally derail a president's totally lawful, totally effective, executive order? if this were an eo by obummer, i'd understand - but this is an eo from a real president, born in america. how does this happen? reverse jim crow?

[CaliCat 3,957]

1 hour ago, Ban Hammer said:

obama is still in office? 

 

It certainly feels this way. The so-called president has done nothing since he was inaugurated, so we're still raking in the benefits from the Obama administration.

[IAMX 3,055]

57 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

It's amazing that people hold to the thought that Hawaii is just some dinky remote island, where everyone doesn't have the same problems that are dealt with in other states. Joke's on them I guess. It'd be great if those people and the current AG could educate themselves. By golly, I sure hope that Jeffy doesn't hope that the criteria for states means they all have to be attached to one central landmass to be one. If the seas ever rise high enough Alabama might not even qualify.

A red herring if there ever was one to detract from the fact that there's nothing common sense, logical, or even mature about throwing tantrums over Sessions enforcing the law. That's why the left are upset about this utterly irrelevant island nonsense. The more attention they can draw away from what really upsets them about Sessions the more valid their tantrums appear. Not falling for it. 

[CaliCat 3,957]

45 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

totally. but on a serious note how does one crazy hawaiian 'federal' judge totally derail a president's totally lawful, totally effective, executive order? if this were an eo by obummer, i'd understand - but this is an eo from a real president, born in america. how does this happen? reverse jim crow?

 

It's a very sad state of affair when the AG lacks the understanding of how the legal system works in our country.

 

 

[smilesammich 10,727]

12 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

It's a very sad state of affair when the AG lacks the understanding of how the legal system works in our country.

 

 

silly, this is all over sessions calling hawaii an island.

[yuna628 9,990]

19 minutes ago, IAMX said:

A red herring if there ever was one to detract from the fact that there's nothing common sense, logical, or even mature about throwing tantrums over Sessions enforcing the law. That's why the left are upset about this utterly irrelevant island nonsense. The more attention they can draw away from what really upsets them about Sessions the more valid their tantrums appear. Not falling for it. 

The only person throwing out red herrings is Sessions himself during his tantrum moments. Checks and balances will continue to operate with or without his acknowledgement or understanding of them.

 

17 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

It's a very sad state of affair when the AG lacks the understanding of how the legal system works in our country.

 

 

I'm not sure many people in this entire country understand how the legal system works, so why should we hold ol' Jeffy to a high standard? Lower the bar, and you'll be suddenly inspired by his brilliance!

[IAMX 3,055]

8 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

The only person throwing out red herrings is Sessions himself during his tantrum moments. Checks and balances will continue to operate with or without his acknowledgement or understanding of them.

 

I'm not sure many people in this entire country understand how the legal system works, so why should we hold ol' Jeffy to a high standard? Lower the bar, and you'll be suddenly inspired by his brilliance!

Sessions is targeting states like Hawaii because they are the ones throwing tantrums and filing a lawsuit about him enforcing immigrant law that's existed centuries. However, he ultimately does have the law on his side when it comes to these very issues of enforcing immigrant law, and for pulling funds from sanctuary cities, so I'm not concerned about Hawaii losing in the end. It's just funny that these leftist states try so hard to defend those who break the law, especially in an aspect of the law they Constitutionally have no say-so on (immigration). Not only is it above their pay grades, but it's clear this frees criminals, especially the violent ones, to go back into these communities. If only they would stay in those communities and leave the others alone. I'd be okay with that then. But, it is what it is.

Edited April 25, 2017 by IAMX

[CaliCat 3,957]

12 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

 

I'm not sure many people in this entire country understand how the legal system works, so why should we hold ol' Jeffy to a high standard? Lower the bar, and you'll be suddenly inspired by his brilliance!

 

You are going in the wrong direction. In these situations the best thing you can do is blame the real culprits: Blame Hillary and blame Obama!

[yuna628 9,990]

28 minutes ago, IAMX said:

Sessions is targeting states like Hawaii because they are the ones throwing tantrums and filing a lawsuit about him enforcing immigrant law that's existed centuries. However, he ultimately does have the law on his side when it comes to these very issues of enforcing immigrant law, and for pulling funds from sanctuary cities, so I'm not concerned about Hawaii losing in the end. It's just funny that these leftist states try so hard to defend those who break the law, especially in an aspect of the law they Constitutionally have no say-so on (immigration). Not only is it above their pay grades, but it's clear this frees criminals, especially the violent ones, to go back into these communities. If only they would stay in those communities and leave the others alone. I'd be okay with that then. But, it is what it is.

Did you miss all the big discussions we've had on this forum about the travel bans and how it's not so cut and dry as you'd like to make it out to be? Your personal feelings on the subject of the legality of Trump's EO under the spectrum of the left or right (which is a whole other ball of messy wax) with regards to immigration doesn't matter. What matters is if there is and was a real legal bearing for states and others to sue a federal government behaving badly. They have a right to do so, whether you or Jeffy likes it or not. Present his case and let the chips fall as they may. There was a real case against the administration, of which many legal experts were confident Trump would be met with a resounding defeat and subsequent tantrum. Which might be one of the reasons why he decided to not really slug it out in court, or even try to mount any sort of legal defense to his case. If you don't even present a case, then don't bother showing up to court (which they barely managed to do). The new EO has more basis under proper checks and balances, which is what should have been done in the first place. The states can still sue if they feel like it, and the government may present it's case to the contrary. That's the way our government and the law works. Hawaii is a state; it has a high population of immigrants, and suffers from the same problems as any other state - such as crime, poverty, homelessness, economy and infrastructure issues, and illegal immigration.

[IAMX 3,055]

4 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Did you miss all the big discussions we've had on this forum about the travel bans and how it's not so cut and dry as you'd like to make it out to be? Your personal feelings on the subject of the legality of Trump's EO under the spectrum of the left or right (which is a whole other ball of messy wax) with regards to immigration doesn't matter. What matters is if there is and was a real legal bearing for states and others to sue a federal government behaving badly. They have a right to do so, whether you or Jeffy likes it or not. Present his case and let the chips fall as they may. There was a real case against the administration, of which many legal experts were confident Trump would be met with a resounding defeat and subsequent tantrum. Which might be one of the reasons why he decided to not really slug it out in court, or even try to mount any sort of legal defense to his case. If you don't even present a case, then don't bother showing up to court (which they barely managed to do). The new EO has more basis under proper checks and balances, which is what should have been done in the first place. The states can still sue if they feel like it, and the government may present it's case to the contrary. That's the way our government and the law works. Hawaii is a state; it has a high population of immigrants, and suffers from the same problems as any other state - such as crime, poverty, homelessness, economy and infrastructure issues, and illegal immigration.

You're getting 100% of your views from whats "legal" and not from a few court rulings from the 9th, a heavily overturned circuit for a reason. Given all this whining and protesting of everything-Trump since November that you clearly support, along with Russia conspiracies that still have not one iota of proof behind them, I seriously doubt you can be trusted to understand the law, never mind understand someone you didn't want to be elected is your President. Your "Jeffy" statement says it all, this is far too personal for you.

Edited April 25, 2017 by IAMX

[smilesammich 10,727]

10 minutes ago, IAMX said:

 Your "Jeffy" statement says it all, this is far too personal for you.

personal like your hatred and intolerance of  'leftists' ?

[TBoneTX 49,411]

Take care now, folks:  we can disagree without being disagreeable.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

23 minutes ago, IAMX said:

You're getting 100% of your views from whats "legal" and not from a few court rulings from the 9th, a heavily overturned circuit for a reason. Given all this whining and protesting of everything-Trump since November that you clearly support, along with Russia conspiracies that still have not one iota of proof behind them, I seriously doubt you can be trusted to understand the law, never mind understand someone you didn't want to be elected is your President. Your "Jeffy" statement says it all, this is far too personal for you.

the concept that the 9th District court is heavily overturned compared to its peer courts is incorrect and often repeated in several corners

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

calling someone "Jeffy" is personal?  I would think comparing someone to a Keebler elf would be personal

Edited April 25, 2017 by ccneat