President boos own team: Trump derides the DOJ on Twitter for submitting “politically correct” travel ban to Supreme Court
JUN. 5, 2017 8:55 AM BY THE RIGHT SCOOP
Trump took to Twitter this morning to publicly deride the DOJ for not sticking with the original travel ban and instead submitting the “watered down” version to the Supreme Court:
 Donald J. Trump
?@realDonaldTrump
People, the lawyers and the courts can call it whatever they want, but I am calling it what we need and what it is, a TRAVEL BAN!
5:25 AM - 5 Jun 2017
Donald J. Trump
?@realDonaldTrump
The Justice Dept. should have stayed with the original Travel Ban, not the watered down, politically correct version they submitted to S.C.
5:29 AM - 5 Jun 2017
Donald J. Trump
?@realDonaldTrump
The Justice Dept. should ask for an expedited hearing of the watered down Travel Ban before the Supreme Court - & seek much tougher version!
5:37 AM - 5 Jun 2017
Donald J. Trump
?@realDonaldTrump
In any event we are EXTREME VETTING people coming into the U.S. in order to help keep our country safe. The courts are slow and political!
5:44 AM - 5 Jun 2017
I don’t understand this. The Trump administration kicked the old travel ban to the curb and wrote a newer version of the travel ban back in early March. It was signed by the president and then publicly unveiled with speeches by Tillerson, Kelly, and Sessions.
Why wouldn’t the DOJ submit that one to the Supreme Court?
Look I’ve had no issues with either travel ban and believe the president has all the authority he needs to implement either one. But this public derision of the DOJ justs feels weird. It’s his DOJ, so shouldn’t they do what he wants them to do? Why is there a need for him to call them out so publicly? And even if there is ‘dissent’ in his administration, why air that dirty laundry on Twitter?
I just don’t get it.
http://therightscoop.com/weird-trump-derides-the-doj-on-twitter-for-submitting-politically-correct-travel-ban-to-supreme-court/
Howard Roark • 6 minutes ago
These rants are why for the 1st time federal courts are factoring in Trumps stump speeches and soundbites as evidence of the EO.
Howard Roark • 8 minutes ago
Trump admits on Twitter to being a weak Chief Executive...
We warned you beginning last year.
LiliVonShtupp • 32 minutes ago
Trump is the crazy uncle yelling at the TV. Once you figure that out, it's easier to shrug.
NewPartyNOW • 35 minutes ago
Trump has sabotaged his own Executive Order by tweeting that it is in fact a "ban".
=============================
Donald J. Trump?Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
People, the lawyers and the courts can call it whatever they want, but I am calling it what we need and what it is, a TRAVEL BAN!
3:25 AM - 5 Jun 2017
==========================================
Slantry halodoc • 33 minutes ago
Ironically, he is also increasing the chances that he will get shot down.
halodoc Slantry • 31 minutes ago
Yep. Shooting himself in the foot once again after sticking his foot in his big, fat mouth. Once again hijacking and FUBARing one more of our issues.
This would all go away in a snap of the fingers if he'd rescind in full Obama's illegal 'DREAMer' EO. But for some reason that still stands as well as they're also increasing the numbers allowed in.
Heathermcsp • 38 minutes ago
He doesn't address the situation face to face with his people because he is a coward!
halodoc Heathermcsp • 30 minutes ago
I'd posit it's more to the point he's lying about his people.
[ There's a reason his lawyers only meet with him in pairs or small groups .. they know he'll misrepresent what they told him. ]
Don Sutherland • an hour ago
From CNN:
After President Trump referred to his executive order on immigration as a "travel ban" in a series of tweets, Sebastian Gorka, a White House national security aide, says the President's tweets are only social media, not policy.
disq.us
Texican • an hour ago
It's clear Republican Obama sat around the WH all weekend by himself watching "the shows". When he does he gets all wound up at what is being said and decides we he needs to respond; which he does in a vacuum without thinking.
Nukeman ?F?????????? • an hour ago
For those who think I never compliment the President, let me compliment him now. He didn't misspell anything in his twiiter feed - for a change.
(ok, that's it for THIS week)
dinodoc Dave Levine • an hour ago
But he's hurting the legal case for his EO with these tweets.
RJP977 • 2 hours ago
It's his department of justice and he signed off on it and he still throws them under the bus. I wonder why he can't get anybody to work for him?
He does one thing that is positive and then follows up with about 20 things that are negative
SodaSaint ?F?????????? MontyRay • 2 hours ago
What aggravates me a lot about this is that this is a POTUS who has such little self control that the government is seriously considering giving him a "Twitter Nanny". How sad and embarrassing is that...?
John_Miller SodaSaint ?F?????????? • an hour ago
Now I would be completely okay with some of my tax money going to pay for a Twitter Nanny...might help prevent additional international and national embarrassments. I'm sure that whatever the cost, it would probably be worth it.
The only issue: Who in the hell would want that job? The guy never sleeps and seems like he would get really grumpy if you tried to take his tweeting phone away from him. Pal, you couldn't pay me enough to do that job!
NewPartyNOW • 2 hours ago
Top headline at CNN :
"Trump says he's calling it a travel ban
The President's stance could hamper the legal argument that his executive order didn't target Muslims"
disq.us
Proving that Trump doesn't care whether the EO is implemented or not.
This is just for show to to placate his rubes.
Choi Su Yeong Nukeman ?F?????????? • 2 hours ago
Of course, his EOs are more like his staff giving him a shiny pen and going "here, Mr. President, sign the big piece of paper! You don't need to read it, just sign it and you'll be the best president ever!"
RoMac Choi Su Yeong • 2 hours ago
...and afterwards you can have 2 scoops of ice cream and a beautiful piece of chocolate cake when you get back from your golf game. Pfffttt
Don Sutherland dinodoc • an hour ago
What one witnessed during the election is akin to manias that lead to destructive financial bubbles. In this case, arguably rational voters suspended reason, set aside principle, and ignored credible information about Donald Trump's deep flaws, to elect him. All considerations of character, leadership capacity, general fitness for office, and policy knowledge were viewed by his core support base as obsolete and irrelevant. Many, including some of us here and at other sites, warned clearly, loudly, and repeatedly that we could not support Donald Trump on grounds of principle, competence, and conscience. Those warnings were brushed aside in the irrational mania that gripped a sufficient slice of the electorate to propel Trump to victory.
The nation experienced a political mania. The resulting bubble is the Trump Presidency. The nation is now experiencing the first fallout from the imploding Trump bubble in the form of policy disarray, chaotic and impulsive decision making, and a fracturing trans-Atlantic alliance.
D Guest • 2 hours ago
It's so he doesn't take any blame from that portion of his supporters who are cultists. He's trying to make sure that no matter what happens it's not on him - if it wins then the left can somehow console itself that it is 'watered down.' If it loses then he can blame the DOJ for watering it down. Also, he sounds tough to his supporters by saying it IS a ban. Wimpy.
Texican • 2 hours ago
Scoop, we're all missing the point of the travel ban. It was to be temporary in order to implement "extreme vetting". Where is the "extreme vetting"? It seems to have gotten lost in Republican Obama obsession with winning. He once again proves he doesn't care about America or Americans, he cares about himself.
dinodoc Texican • 2 hours ago
According to him, they are already doing it:
In any event we are EXTREME VETTING people coming into the U.S. in order to help keep our country safe. The courts are slow and political!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 5, 2017
What's the Admin reason for the "ban" now? This keeps getting weirder.
Texican dinodoc • 2 hours ago
What changes did he make to vetting? Saying it doesn't make it so. As you say, do we now need the ban if we are extreme vetting?
Agent1220 • 2 hours ago
Trump has a very rudimentary understanding of how our government works. I know the people around him are trying to give him a crash course, but he's in way over his head.
Don Sutherland dinodoc • 3 hours ago
President Trump speaks for his Administration. The Supreme Court should view the case before it as President Trump articulates it.
vetgal1970 Don Sutherland • 3 hours ago
I suspect that Gorsuch is going to go from hero to zero in no time. trump is sort of backing the SC into a corner because he refuses to shut it.
[ I wonder if he's smart enough to actually want his EO to fail? Then he has something to blame when the next terror attack comes. ]
dinodoc Don Sutherland • 3 hours ago
The original ban he's touting here was a pile of crap rushed out for the chance at a photo op rather than as serious policy though.
Don Sutherland • 3 hours ago
President Trump's latest Twitter explosion highlights that he is combustible, unmoored from reality, and impulsive in his thoughts and actions. It also reveals a lack of self-awareness and an extreme willingness to view his staff as disposable and their expertise as dispensable. So far, NATO's Article 5 collective defense guarantee and broader trans-Atlantic relations have been battered by the Trump "wrecking ball." His unnecessary and insensitive tweets in the wake of the London terrorist attack further widened the growing divide created by his Administration.
In this specific case, Trump has again made clear that what the Department of Justice's lawyers have told various courts has nothing to do with his intent behind the executive orders in question. He has undercut the Department of Justice and the credibility of its arguments, much as he apparently undercut his national security/foreign policy team. That's not an act of leadership. It is further evidence of a lack of fitness to lead.
In the wake of his latest Twitter storm, I now believe the U.S. Supreme Court should uphold, not overturn, the lower court rulings related to the Trump executive order now before it. Trump's tweets raise a fundamental question as to whether his executive order, its security-related arguments notwithstanding, is actually aimed at undercutting fundamental constitutional protections. In a case where there is ambiguity between a President's intentions and the requirements of upholding the Constitution, I err on the side of the Constitution. It is not even close.
Yes, I will be slammed for adopting this position. But, Trump's tweets suggest the existence of motives that are potentially ruinous in terms of the nation's constitutional framework.
If one recalls, the initial version of the executive order blocked lawful permanent residents from re-entry into the United States, a few of whom were actually turned back upon attempts to re-enter the U.S. Lawful permanent residents enjoy full constitutional protection with the exception of the limited provisions that apply uniquely to citizens (e.g., the right to vote). Today's tweets suggest that the line of thinking that drove the original executive order still stands. It also suggests that President Trump sees the current executive order as merely one step toward going back to something along the lines of his initial order.
Perhaps, in the wake of the London terrorist attack, Trump is simply panicking. But the dangers of impulsive policy making are too great to ignore. They should not be ignored.
Clearly, there needs to be a thoughtful, informed, evidence-based discussion of national security. Immigration and naturalization and travel within the context of the nation's constitutional framework need to be part of that larger discussion. Based on Trump's tweets, that discussion has not been had. For that discussion to start, the debris of potentially constitutionally-questionable executive orders needs to be cleared. A Supreme Court ruling in that direction can help.
Such a Supreme Court ruling would raise the question as to whether a Trump Administration setback could hobble future Administrations. Such a risk is real. However, that risk is far smaller than the risks associated with a compromise of the Constitution itself. Further, a precisely-worded ruling can mitigate much of that risk going forward. Narrow language can tie the ruling to a particular Administration's excesses (and perhaps examples of past ones, too, e.g., the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II) where constitutional protections were overridden, undermined, or placed at material risk.
Proud Veteran • 3 hours ago
One of the things I learned about leadership is give subordinates a clear task & you don't criticize subordinates in public. Criticism should be made in private & should be constructive.
Conservator1 Proud Veteran • 3 hours ago
No they don't; his tweets exhibit a pure authoritarian who spent 40 years barking orders that had to be obeyed by his sheep who had to call him Mr. Trump.
Trump still hasn't learned it's his presidency and not his business. He needs a staff that is cohesive and working in harmony to fulfill his agenda.
IMO, this WH will implode in the 1st term. |
