Trump Will Not Back Down

By dianeravitch

January 29, 2017 //

Trump is not backing down from his immigration ban from seven countries, excluding even those with green cards.

Categories Trump

27 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

Yvonne Siu-Runyan says:

January 29, 2017 at 10:35 am

Guess he forgot that HIS family IMMIGRATED here. Duh…aren’t we all immigrants except fot the Native Americans? What a moron. Maybe they immigrated here via first class in a five-star cruise ship.

LikeLike

Reply
- jscheidell says:
  
  January 30, 2017 at 8:31 am
  
  All immigrants are not citizens until they go through the process established and no immigrant has citizen rights in US
  
  Obama had a 6 month band on Iraquis but none of Hollywood or left complained another double standard and an effort to deligetimize Trump
  This is only for 90 days to allow review of process
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  - dianeravitch says:
    
    January 30, 2017 at 9:00 am
    
    Jscheidell,
    
    The Washington Post reviewed that claim that Obama banned Iraqis for six months and concluded it was false. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/01/29/trumps-facile-claim-that-his-refugee-policy-is-similar-to-obama-in-2011/
    
    There were three key differences, of which this was one:
    
    “Obama’s policy did not prevent all citizens of that country, including green-card holders, from traveling to the United States. Trump’s policy is much more sweeping, though officials have appeared to pull back from barring permanent U.S. residents.”
    
    LikeLike
  - jscheidell says:
    
    January 30, 2017 at 3:19 pm
    
    Diane,
    Thanks for the WAPO story. There is a slight difference to be noted.
    
    The Obama Administration Stopped Processing Iraq Refugee Requests For 6 Months In 2011
    NOVEMBER 18, 2015 By Sean Davis
    
    Although the Obama administration currently refuses to temporarily pause its Syrian refugee resettlement program in the United States, the State Department in 2011 stopped processing Iraq refugee requests for six months after the Federal Bureau of Investigation uncovered evidence that several dozen terrorists from Iraq had infiltrated the United States via the refugee program.
    
    After two terrorists were discovered in Bowling Green, Kentucky, in 2009, the FBI began reviewing reams of evidence taken from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that had been used against American troops in Iraq. Federal investigators then tried to match fingerprints from those bombs to the fingerprints of individuals who had recently entered the United States as refugees:
    
    An intelligence tip initially led the FBI to Waad Ramadan Alwan, 32, in 2009. The Iraqi had claimed to be a refugee who faced persecution back home — a story that shattered when the FBI found his fingerprints on a cordless phone base that U.S. soldiers dug up in a gravel pile south of Bayji, Iraq on Sept. 1, 2005. The phone base had been wired to unexploded bombs buried in a nearby road.
    An ABC News investigation of the flawed U.S. refugee screening system, which was overhauled two years ago, showed that Alwan was mistakenly allowed into the U.S. and resettled in the leafy southern town of Bowling Green, Kentucky, a city of 60,000 which is home to Western Kentucky University and near the Army’s Fort Knox and Fort Campbell. Alwan and another Iraqi refugee, Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, 26, were resettled in Bowling Green even though both had been detained during the war by Iraqi authorities, according to federal prosecutors.
    The terrorists were not taken into custody until 2011. Shortly thereafter, the U.S. State Department stopped processing refugee requests from Iraqis for six months in order to review and revamp security screening procedures:
    
    As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News – even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets. One Iraqi who had aided American troops was assassinated before his refugee application could be processed, because of the immigration delays, two U.S. officials said. In 2011, fewer than 10,000 Iraqis were resettled as refugees in the U.S., half the number from the year before, State Department statistics show.
    According to a 2013 report from ABC News, at least one of the Kentucky terrorists passed background and fingerprint checks conducted by the Department of Homeland Security prior to being allowed to enter the United States. Without the fingerprint evidence taken from roadside bombs, which one federal forensic scientist referred to as “a needle in the haystack,” it is unlikely that the two terrorists would ever have been identified and apprehended.
    
    “How did a person who we detained in Iraq — linked to an IED attack, we had his fingerprints in our government system — how did he walk into America in 2009?” asked one former Army general who previously oversaw the U.S. military’s anti-IED efforts.
    
    President Barack Obama has thus far refused bipartisan calls to pause his administration’s Syrian refugee program, which many believe is likely to be exploited by terrorists seeking entry into the United States. The president has not explained how his administration can guarantee that no terrorists will be able to slip into the country by pretending to be refugees, as the Iraqi terrorists captured in Kentucky did in 2009. One of those terrorists, Waad Ramadan Alwan, even came into the United States by way of Syria, where his fingerprints were taken and given to U.S. military intelligence officials.
    
    Obama has also refused to explain how his administration’s security-related pause on processing Iraq refugee requests in 2011 did not “betray our deepest values.”
    
    Sean Davis is the co-founder of The Federalist.
    
    LikeLike
  - jscheidell says:
    
    January 30, 2017 at 3:38 pm
    
    Diane,
    
    I went to the wording of the Order
    
    This Is a Temporary Pause to Assess the Situation
    Another difference that’s significant is that Trump’s order is not permanent, but temporary, lasting three to four months. It also allows for exceptions. According to the order,
    
    [T]o ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas). . . .
    [T]he Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.
    
    Regarding Syria,
    
    Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest.
    [T]he Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest — including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious persecution, when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement, or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship — and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States.
    
    Where’s the racism? Where’s the cruelty? It’s not there. The Huffington Post accused the president of targeting Muslims, yet nowhere does the order mention any ethnic group. These countries include a variety of religions, cultures, and ethnicities.
    
    LikeLike
retired teacher says:

January 29, 2017 at 11:10 am

The ACLU have managed to get a stay against Trump’s immigration ban in federal court. I am sure Trump and his team are looking for a loophole. https://www.aclu.org/news/federal-court-grants-stay-challenge-trump-immigration-ban

LikeLike

Reply
- Ellen Lubic says:
  
  January 29, 2017 at 12:27 pm
  
  However, Retired teacher, as of this AM, the police in the airports are breaking the law and are ignoring the NJ judge’s ruling. They are siding with Trump and doing his bidding with the immigrants. This is a very frightening situation and shows that those who enforce the law, will follow the law of Bannon/Trump and not the law of the land.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  - Duane E Swacker says:
    
    January 29, 2017 at 1:01 pm
    
    If that is the case (do you have a link?unhthose police should be arrested and properly charged with whatever law that would apply to law officers not following a judges legal order.
    
    I hope someone is taking names and badge numbers, videoing them breaking the law.
    
    LikeLike
  - Ellen Lubic says:
    
    January 29, 2017 at 9:58 pm
    
    Can’t seem to create a link nor scan it…but Duane… it is in the NY Post online today with a photo of cops being aggressive.
    
    LikeLike
GregB says:

January 29, 2017 at 11:28 am

Nor should we back down. In 35 minutes, we will have had 9 full days of the reign of Donald I. Never has one changed the character of this nation so quickly.

Waiting for the “But Hillary…” folks to let me know how much worse it would have been under her administration. I want to thank everyone out there who convinced me to vote for her.

LikeLike

Reply
- Ellen Lubic says:
  
  January 29, 2017 at 12:31 pm
  
  Greg..the Dems must reevaluate and act in unity to win back the Congress in 2018. If they continue to let the old hacks run the party, we will see only disaster from the Repubs. Tom Perez has been on many panels lately and is showing himself to be IMO the most viable candidate to run the DNC.
  
  And the worst of it now is that so many Dems have betrayed us and voted with Repubs in the last two weeks. These turncoats include some who seemed to be the best of our leaders.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  - Duane E Swacker says:
    
    January 29, 2017 at 1:02 pm
    
    The key word in your last statement is “seemed”.
    
    LikeLike
  - Ellen Lubic says:
    
    January 30, 2017 at 1:13 am
    
    Duane…you really have a handle on my style.
    
    LikeLike
Gordon Wilder says:

January 29, 2017 at 11:40 am

The NBA is seeking clarification for their players. Around the world the political leaders as well as their people are appalled as should we be.
Too, the Iraqi’s who laid their lives helping us are now banned. What does THAT say about getting those we need most to join in the fight we need to make? Who among them will lay their lives on the line for us?
Madness.
Archie Bunker mentality exemplified.

LikeLike

Reply
Laura H. Chapman says:

January 29, 2017 at 12:07 pm

The ACLU lawyers are getting geared up to fight the next executive order. I think Trump is going to throw “crooked judges” into the media sphere ASAP.

Meanwhile, the very rich are seriously concerned about their own survival and (belatedly) the institutions of a democratic and civil society. This from a post-Davos article in the New Yorker: by Evan Osnos, “Doomsday Prep For The Super-Rich.”

The article by Osnos begins with an account of the anxiety, survivalist mindset, and actual preparations of super-rich individuals for a collapse of the institutions they have long taken for granted.

Osnos offers some quotes from Robert A. Johnson head of the think tank: Institute for New Economic Thinking and Robert H. Dugger, a member of the Governing Board.

Osnos says: Even financiers who supported Trump for President, hoping that he would cut taxes and regulations, have been unnerved at the ways his insurgent campaign seems to have hastened a collapse of respect for established institutions….

Dugger says: “The media is under attack now. They (the super-rich) wonder, Is the court system next? Do we go from ‘fake news’ to ‘fake evidence’? For people whose existence depends on enforceable contracts, this is life or death.”

Johnson, who spoke at the Davos ingathering of the super-rich said: “Twenty-five hedge-fund managers make more money than all of the kindergarten teachers in America combined.” “Being one of those twenty-five doesn’t feel good.”

According to Osnos, a December 2016 report from the National Bureau of Economic Research says that “the typical income for the top one per cent has nearly tripled” since 1980. That gap is comparable to the gap between average incomes in the U.S. and the Democratic Republic of Congo.”

Johnson again: “If we had a more equal distribution of income, and much more money and energy going into public school systems, parks and recreation, the arts, and health care, it could take an awful lot of sting out of society. We’ve largely dismantled those things.”

The Institute for New Economic Thinking was founded in 2009 with a $50M gift from George Soros.

If you are wondering if any economists are challenging the orthodoxy of “free-market fundamentalism, read the purpose of this think tank. https://www.ineteconomics.org/about/our-purpose

LikeLike

Reply
- Gordon Wilder says:
  
  January 29, 2017 at 1:00 pm
  
  What a tremendous posting.
  Those who have “worshiped” the golden calf, monetary acquisition should remember that we came within HOURS of a complete meltdown where our monetary system – worldwide ” almost collapsed and their “perceived” wealth would have become useless. False gods,
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
Joe says:

January 29, 2017 at 12:10 pm

Banning Iraqis, our ally?! Just nuts, insane and a slap in the face to Iraq and Iraqis. Not to mention Trump’s recent off the cuff comments about going back into Iraq and grabbing the oil for ourselves. This was all to be expected given that Trump is a lying, out of touch, tone deaf foreign relations ignoramus. His bullying of Mexico is just beyond the pale and totally avoidable. But Trump enjoys being the bully-in-chief and lording it over a much smaller weaker country.

LikeLike

Reply
- Ellen Lubic says:
  
  January 29, 2017 at 12:35 pm
  
  It is so weird that Saudi Arabic which gave us 14 of 911 bombers, and Egypt which gave us one, and Morocco which gave us one, are not considered to be terrorist countries. The Saudis get so much favored status in the US even though they are proven to be the world’s leading terrorist proponent nation. Oil cash speaks volumes.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  - cary444 (@cary444) says:
    
    January 29, 2017 at 12:45 pm
    
    I believe he has business dealings with those countries…ahhhhhh true madness!
    
    LikeLike
- retired teacher says:
  
  January 29, 2017 at 1:23 pm
  
  Trump is a bully in addition to being a liar. He is alienating Mexico. He wants to punish Mexico, but they are not the group currently coming here. It is the central Americans that are crossing the border. They are fleeing drug gangs and an extreme drought. Mexicans at this time are more likely to be returning to Mexico.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  - Norwegian Filmmaker says:
    
    January 29, 2017 at 2:24 pm
    
    Those countries have dire poverty due to the model of government Trump and Company want SO badly to set up, establish and root here!
    
    Ironic!
    
    LikeLike
- jscheidell says:
  
  January 30, 2017 at 3:42 pm
  
  Joe,
  Did you support Obama’s Iraqis 2011 situation resulting from a Kentucky item?
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  - dianeravitch says:
    
    January 30, 2017 at 3:51 pm
    
    Jscheidell,
    
    ISIS is very happy with Trump’s ban. It will help isolate us and make it more difficult to get any Iraqis or others in the 7 countries to help us fight ISIS.
    
    Are you pleased with Trump’s alliance with Putin? Apparently we will switch sides to support Assad in Syria and crush the rebels we used to support. You good with that?
    
    LikeLike
Eugene Gant says:

January 29, 2017 at 5:28 pm

I suggest that a campaign of United State Citizen start calling/writing/e-mailing their Senators and Representatives and DEMAND that every one of them read/write into the Congressional Record for all to see and read what their positions are on all Trump’s Executive Orders. I do not mean just a yes or no support answer. I mean if the answer is yes then why to does the elected official support the Executive Order. If no, then why does the Senator or Representative not support the Executive Order. These men and women are our elected representation to the Congress of the United States. They owe it to the US Citizens to tell us where they stand on all of Trump’s Executive Orders. Hold their feet to the fire. I know some will not have the intestinal fortitude to do as suggested and others will give only vague answers.

LikeLike

Reply
- jscheidell says:
  
  January 30, 2017 at 3:28 pm
  
  This suggestion should have been made during Obamas regime!
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
jscheidell says:

January 30, 2017 at 3:27 pm

If I remember and I always stand to be corrected – the list of 7 countries was developed by Obama administration and although the left pouring of claims it is Muslim religious based must have missed the fact that 30 -40 Muslim countries not on the list. Also I remember the Clinton State of the Nation address which was almost word for word on the issue is same as rumps – but no one from left or Hollywood paraded in opposition.
The left hasn’t figured out what Trump is doing – they mustt not have listened to him – The reason this was not done with a 2 week notice – I guess he didn’t want a rush of these people to get in until they do a review…

LikeLike

Reply
jscheidell says:

January 30, 2017 at 3:47 pm

As David French writes at National Review, “Before 2016, when Obama dramatically ramped up refugee admissions, Trump’s 50,000 stands roughly in-between a typical year of refugee admissions in George W. Bush’s two terms and a typical year in Obama’s two terms.”

In 2002, the United States admitted only 27,131 refugees. It admitted fewer than 50,000 in 2003, 2006, and 2007. As for President Obama, he was slightly more generous than President Bush, but his refugee cap from 2013 to 2015 was a mere 70,000, and in 2011 and 2012 he admitted barely more than 50,000 refugees himself.

The bottom line is that Trump is improving security screening and intends to admit refugees at close to the average rate of the 15 years before Obama’s dramatic expansion in 2016. Obama’s expansion was a departure from recent norms, not Trump’s contraction.

LikeLike

Reply