Immigration Ban

[rjd970]

Didn't see this posted yet.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-trump-immigration-ban-conflict-of-interest/

It's a draft proposal, but this looks pretty bad on its surface. I have a bridge to sell you if you don't think the Saudis or UAE present legitimate immigrant terrorism concerns.

If you are going to do this, then do it. Excluding countries you have business ties to just gives fodder to the concerns regarding conflict of interest...whether it's the real case or not.

 

[sammyhagar]

.

 

[FLVOL_79]

.

Then they would have to behead themselves.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Omg Trumps muslim ban doesn't include countries who the US have been allies with for decades? IT must be a conspiracy!!!!!!

 

[TN Ribs]

More shenanigans from Trump if the draft is accurate. And yet he refuses to release his tax returns or divest from his businesses - so much for transparency!

 

[rjd970]

Omg Trumps muslim ban doesn't include countries who the US have been allies with for decades? IT must be a conspiracy!!!!!!

We have an embassy in Iraq. All 911 hijackers were Saudis.

If you are going to do this then do it.

 

[Rockvegas]

President Trump is smarter than you beloved Supreme Leader Obama.

 

[rjd970]

President Trump is smarter than you beloved Supreme Leader Obama.

I don't care either way. I've taken a sit back and see approach with Trump. I like how he isn't beholden to any special interests. Not taking the salary. It really frees him up to make the tough calls.

But the collective aneurysm from the right had this been Obama would have been loud and theatric. This is why he should have set up his business in a blind trust and released tax returns even though he wasn't legally required to do so. Even the appearance of impropriety isn't good, independent of whether it is actually there or not. These questions will get raised continually otherwise.

 

[FLVOL_79]

We have an embassy in Iraq. All 911 hijackers were Saudis.

If you are going to do this then do it.

We have an Embassy in Libya too..

First off they aren't going to ban the Saudis. The US is in too deep with them and that goes back a coons age. Sad but a harsh reality.

Syria, Sudan, and Iran have been officially declared State sponsors of Terrorism going back almost 40 years...so that comes as no surprise. Yemen is in the midst of a civil war/war with Saudi. Obama sent Libya into a Civil war that has been going on for almost six years now. Somalia has been in a perpetual civil war for about 30 years now...see the trend?

Pakistan is really the only country missing from that list but obviously its because Trump must have hotels, casinos, distilleries, and textile mills there..

 

[DancingOutlaw]

.

People like that should put their money where their mouth is and take in Syrian refugees.

 

[FLVOL_79]

I don't care either way. I've taken a sit back and see approach with Trump. I like how he isn't beholden to any special interests. Not taking the salary. It really frees him up to make the tough calls.

But the collective aneurysm from the right had this been Obama would have been loud and theatric. This is why he should have set up his business in a blind trust and released tax returns even though he wasn't legally required to do so. Even the appearance of impropriety isn't good, independent of whether it is actually there or not. These questions will get raised continually otherwise.

You can relax..you know..checks and balances..

 

[rjd970]

We have an Embassy in Libya too..

First off they aren't going to ban the Saudis. The US is in too deep with them and that goes back a coons age. Sad but a harsh reality.

Syria, Sudan, and Iran have been officially declared State sponsors of Terrorism going back almost 40 years...so that comes as no surprise. Yemen is in the midst of a civil war/war with Saudi. Obama sent Libya into a Civil war that has been going on for almost six years now. Somalia has been in a perpetual civil war for about 30 years now...see the trend?

Pakistan is really the only country missing from that list but obviously its because Trump must have hotels, casinos, distilleries, and textile mills there..

Since when does Trump care about alliances? Look what he is doing with Mexico his first week in office. If you are really serious about stopping the influx of terrorism then Saudi is the first place you go after.

Agree on all those countries, but I don't think civil unrest and war are discriminators. Turkey isn't exactly the most stable country right now anyway.

Any way you look at it objectively, there is a legitimate argument to be made that this is a conflict of interest. Both sides of this issue can be argued compellingly. He let's go of his business for the next 4-8 years and that argument vanishes. Only a partisan fool fails to see both sides here.

 

[DinkinFlicka]

Since when does Trump care about alliances? Look what he is doing with Mexico his first week in office. If you are really serious about stopping the influx of terrorism then Saudi is the first place you go after.

Agree on all those countries, but I don't think civil unrest and war are discriminators. Turkey isn't exactly the most stable country right now anyway.

Any way you look at it objectively, there is a legitimate argument to be made that this is a conflict of interest. Both sides of this issue can be argued compellingly. He let's go of his business for the next 4-8 years and that argument vanishes. Only a partisan fool fails to see both sides here.

Well, look at who you're attempting discourse with.

 

[volinbham]

Didn't see this posted yet.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-trump-immigration-ban-conflict-of-interest/

It's a draft proposal, but this looks pretty bad on its surface. I have a bridge to sell you if you don't think the Saudis or UAE present legitimate immigrant terrorism concerns.

If you are going to do this, then do it. Excluding countries you have business ties to just gives fodder to the concerns regarding conflict of interest...whether it's the real case or not.

Iran is the only country of the group I'd have a quibble with - I don't think Iranian citizens have shown themselves to be a terror threat.

No complaint at all with Syria, Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Yemen and probably Sudan.

Saudi Arabia is the wildcard

I'm skeptical it's a straight avoid ones with business interests. For example, he's more likely to have sought deals with more developed countries; more developed countries are less likely to be the source of terrorists (again Saudi Arabia is the wild card) so I'm not sure the direction of the causal path.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Since when does Trump care about alliances? Look what he is doing with Mexico his first week in office. If you are really serious about stopping the influx of terrorism then Saudi is the first place you go after.

Agree on all those countries, but I don't think civil unrest and war are discriminators. Turkey isn't exactly the most stable country right now anyway.

Any way you look at it objectively, there is a legitimate argument to be made that this is a conflict of interest. Both sides of this issue can be argued compellingly. He let's go of his business for the next 4-8 years and that argument vanishes. Only a partisan fool fails to see both sides here.

I'm not a fan of the Saudi alliance..nor the Egypt one. They get a bunch of money and military equipment/training and export a lot of terror.

But if the USA had to pick between Mexico and Saudi for alliances, they are going Saudi 100% of the time. Oil > cheap labor.

 

[UT_Dutchman]

Iran is the only country of the group I'd have a quibble with - I don't think Iranian citizens have shown themselves to be a terror threat.

No complaint at all with Syria, Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Yemen and probably Sudan.

Saudi Arabia is the wildcard

I'm skeptical it's a straight avoid ones with business interests. For example, he's more likely to have sought deals with more developed countries; more developed countries are less likely to be the source of terrorists (again Saudi Arabia is the wild card) so I'm not sure the direction of the causal path.

Joking, if not ever heard of the Ayatollah Khomeini? Hostage crisis from 1979 to 1981? No I would say they still hold a grudge against America.

 

[LouderVol]

Iran is the only country of the group I'd have a quibble with - I don't think Iranian citizens have shown themselves to be a terror threat.

No complaint at all with Syria, Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Yemen and probably Sudan.

Saudi Arabia is the wildcard

I'm skeptical it's a straight avoid ones with business interests. For example, he's more likely to have sought deals with more developed countries; more developed countries are less likely to be the source of terrorists (again Saudi Arabia is the wild card) so I'm not sure the direction of the causal path.

Came here to say basically this.

 

[volinbham]

Joking, if not ever heard of the Ayatollah Khomeini? Hostage crisis from 1979 to 1981? No I would say they still hold a grudge against America.

It's not about the leadership of the country - it's the likelihood that citizen immigrants from that country are terrorists.

Iran is a huge state sponsor of terrorism but I don't recall hearing about Iranian terrorists the way you do Somali or Yemeni.

The citizens of Iran used to be pretty pro-USA even during Khonmeni's time.

 

[volinbham]

So if he added Saudi Arabia and dropped Iran would that fix the issue? I get that people will see the appearance of a conflict.

 

[lawgator1]

Do not question Dear Leader!

 

[rjd970]

Iran is the only country of the group I'd have a quibble with - I don't think Iranian citizens have shown themselves to be a terror threat.

No complaint at all with Syria, Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Yemen and probably Sudan.

Saudi Arabia is the wildcard

I'm skeptical it's a straight avoid ones with business interests. For example, he's more likely to have sought deals with more developed countries; more developed countries are less likely to be the source of terrorists (again Saudi Arabia is the wild card) so I'm not sure the direction of the causal path.

Would this even be a question/issue if he set aside his business interests? My answer would be "No".

By the way, I'm not even saying there is a conflict here for sure. I am saying the appearance of one is absolutely there.

 

[Velo Vol]

How about we screen people based on who they are rather than where they happen to have been born?

 

[volinbham]

Would this even be a question/issue if he set aside his business interests? My answer would be "No".

By the way, I'm not even saying there is a conflict here for sure. I am saying the appearance of one is absolutely there.

I don't disagree.

 

[volinbham]

How about we screen people based on who they are rather than where they happen to have been born?

Sure but as I understand it the plan is for a temporary ban while we improve the system for doing exactly what you suggest.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

More shenanigans from Trump if the draft is accurate. And yet he refuses to release his tax returns or divest from his businesses - so much for transparency!

You are probably one of those people who think if Trump releases his tax returns, its going to show some kind of accurate figures. Nobody who gets to be as wealthy as Trump without fully exploiting the absolutely horrid tax code that has been on the books forever. Keep the butthurt flowing though. Your tears now and for the next 4 years will be salty yet sweet.