Live Anti-Trump Protests from JFK Airport 01/28/2017

[Joe Fan]

Here is the official DHS statement

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/01/29/department-homeland-security-response-recent-litigation

A few quotes

“President Trump’s Executive Orders remain in place—prohibited travel will remain prohibited, and the U.S. government retains its right to revoke visas at any time if required for national security or public safety.”

“Approximately 80 million international travelers enter the United States every year.

“Yesterday, less than one percent of the more than 325,000 international air travelers who arrive every day were inconvenienced while enhanced security measures were implemented.

“These individuals went through enhanced security screenings and are being processed for entry to the United States, consistent with our immigration laws and judicial orders.

“The Department of Homeland Security will faithfully execute the immigration laws, and we will treat all of those we encounter humanely and with professionalism.

“No foreign national in a foreign land, without ties to the United States, has any unfettered right to demand entry into the United States or to demand immigration benefits in the United States......"

 

[Joe Fan]

8 USC §1182(f)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Joe Fan]

re: this guy one post above

Here is the CNN written online portion
Can you guess what they left out?
You already know
They left out the part where he said he likes Trump
LOL

"According to court papers, both Darweesh and Alshawi were legally allowed to come into the US but were detained in accordance with Trump’s order.

Darweesh, who worked as an interpreter for the US during the Iraq War, was released from detention early Saturday afternoon.

“America is the land of freedom,” he told reporters at the airport shortly after his release. “America is the greatest nation.”

A source with knowledge of the case confirmed Darweesh will be allowed into the US due to provisions in Trump’s order that allow the State and Homeland Security departments to admit individuals into the US on a case-by-case base for certain reasons, including when the person is already in transit and it would cause undue hardship and would not pose a threat to the security of the US.

The suit said Darweesh held a special immigrant visa, which he was granted the day of Trump’s inauguration on January 20, due to his work for the US government from 2003 to 2013."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/polit...g-detained-in-ny-due-to-travel-ban/index.html

 

[Horn6721]

Prod,
Thanks for the clarification. So under BO people affected had to wait through the normal vetting which at that time was 18-24 months. For now we know President Trump's plan is a temporary halt of 90 days while we determine if the information we are getting is adequate so we know who these people are and if they pose a threat or not. Depending on the findings there could be a new vetting process put in place that could be shorter but more stringent than the old one.
Plus he has banned Any refugees for 4 months.
I35 made an excellent point that our warriors are away from home in hostile areas fighting islamists so a few hours in the safety of the USA while we determine the people are not threats seems trifling.
The way the MSM celebs and pols are treating this is disgusting. I hope the average person sees through all the crap.

 

[Joe Fan]

bad hombres

 

[Joe Fan]

I guess you guys are all terrorists now

 

[Joe Fan]

reminder --

The US accepts 1 million immigrants a year, legally.
Or, more than any other country in the world.

 

[texas_ex2000]

The difference is that the program referenced there had to do with changes to the waver program, which meant that people from those countries were not eligible to travel for a short time without a visa. They could still travel to the US - they weren't actually banned, at least from what I read. They just couldn't get into the express line.

I'm not saying Trump is banning people from those countries permanently, but he is banning them temporarily.

I think the point was that, unless Obama was racist against Muslims, these countries were already singled out/discriminated for enhanced vetting by the previous administration.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I think the point was that, unless Obama was racist against Muslims, these countries were already singled out/discriminated for enhanced vetting by the previous administration.

The difference between tweaking the process for these 7-countries and stopping the process, including Greencard holders while carving out religious exceptions is palpable.

Overall, the Trump Administration handled the implementation of this EO very ham-fistedly despite their decrees that it was "smooth".

 

[texas_ex2000]

The difference between tweaking the process for these 7-countries and stopping the process, including Greencard holders while carving out religious exceptions is palpable.

Why did Obama select these specific countries to "tweak"* Husker? What was his criteria?

The specific criticism about why these countries and not other countries are accusations of Trump Organization cronyism. No one protesting or facebooking or the vast majority of the pundits on CNN know about and/or care to address the creation and discrimination criteria of the VWP country list.

*"tweak", as in not needing any visa to now having to wait 18 - 24 months...just that.

Overall, the Trump Administration handled the implementation of this EO very ham-fistedly despite their decrees that it was "smooth".

The only thing I think they could have done better is to direct Customs to allow anyone in transit at the time of EO to go through normally. Maybe that was what was supposed to happen, and it wasn't communicated properly by the White House. I imagine the 100 or so people detained is hardly an extraordinarily large number compared to the number of people temporarily detained by Customs every single day. And it appears they will all be processed through by today.

What's sad for the media, is their description of this EO as something unprecedented...something fundamentally changing to our history as CNN puts is http://cnn.it/2kicc0U. Except, that's absolute rubbish. As has been pointed out, this has happened many many times, including twice by Obama, over the last 6 administrations. On the obvious contrary, Trump's EO is based on the point that IT IS, IN FACT, PRECEDENTED.

Just for everyone's information, Obama stranded over a THOUSAND Cuban migrants (who would have had full legal status) when he did his own immigration ban just 3 weeks ago. For some reason, no one protested.

It's funny how liberals always make an excuse of how their actions are different or not the same. It's different because it's a Democrat that was in the White House. This is a media campaign, not media coverage.

https://nyti.ms/2kkyf3I

Finally, six months after fleeing Cuba on a tortuous journey to the United States, Marleni Barbier, a dental assistant from Havana, made it to the border with Texas — about 12 hours too late.

More than 1,000 Cuban migrants who endured monthslong treks across as many as 10 countries to reach the United States are marooned in Mexico, halted by the Obama administration’s decision this month to end special immigration privileges for Cubans who make it to the American border.

http://www.havanatimes.org/?p=123209

HAVANA TIMES – Barack Obama will make no exception for Cubans en route to the United States caught by surprise by the immediate end to the “dry feet, wet feet” policy that would have given them a new future in the USA.

On several occasions the administration had assured it had no change in immigration policy for Cubans in mind. Obama turns over the presidency to Donald Trump on Friday, January 20th.

The bad news for the Cubans came in Washington today voiced by Ben Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser and the architect of the United States’ rapprochement to the island. Many of the migrants had sold everything they owned before leaving Cuba to make the long, dangerous and expensive journey north.

Rhodes said it would be impossible to determine who was on their way to the US last week when the Obama administration ended the policy by which Cubans intercepted at sea (wet feet) were expelled, but those who managed to reach US soil (dry feet) could stay in the country. The same went for Cubans arriving without a visa at any US border station where they were immediately welcomed and put on a fast track to permanent residency.

 

[Horn6721]

? Husker.
Did President Trump ban green card holders? I did not know that.
If so that should be changed.

 

[texas_ex2000]

? Husker.
Did President Trump ban green card holders? I did not know that.
If so that should be changed.

He did not. They clarified that yesterday.

I think Border Patrol/Customs officials might be directed just to be a little more critical on the inbound interview for green card holders coming too and from, say, Yemen.

@Mr. Deez @NJlonghorn
How legitimate are the "unconstitutional" arguments? It's a pretty short straightforward temporary EO.

 

[Horn6721]

Thanks 2000
So you are saying one should read the actual EO instead of msm headlines and stories?

 

[texas_ex2000]

Thanks 2000
So you are saying one should read the actual EO instead of msm headlines and stories?

The next 8 years will be exhausting, because the Left and the Media will always press the hyperbolic DEFCON One alarm.

The fact Trump really isn't a politician in the traditional sense will feed it too. For an industry who claims their mission is to "hold our politicans" in check*, I'm surprised by their lack of critical thinking skills. E.g. Factcheck - Trump lied to you! Some of the border will be a FENCE not a wall he promised!

*The only mission of journalism is to report facts.

 

[NJlonghorn]

He did not. They clarified that yesterday.

I think Border Patrol/Customs officials might be directed just to be a little more critical on the inbound interview for green card holders coming too and from, say, Yemen.

@Mr. Deez @NJlonghorn
How legitimate are the "unconstitutional" arguments? It's a pretty short straightforward temporary EO.

This is not an area of law I am familiar with. I could study up but don't have time right now.

 

[Horn6721]

Unless there is something totally different in this ban if it was not unconstitutional the dozens if other times other Potuses have done it how could it be this time?

 

[horninchicago]

Unless there is something totally different in this ban if it was not unconstitutional the dozens if other times other Potuses have done it how could it be this time?

Because, you know, evil, racist, fascist Trump. Come on, man.

 

[Horn6721]

Apparently such current whiners of President Trump's EO like Biden and Jerry Brown were against letting in Vietnamese refugees including orphans. Brown even tried to stop flights from landing at Travis.

and in November 2015 Crying Schumer advised a halt to letting refugees in might be necessary, to make sure the vetting was thorough enough.
http://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/...y-halt-of-syrian-refugees-to-the-us/274894843
"New York Senator Chuck Schumer - a Democrat - is being cautious.
"We should allow no refugee into this country, whether it's New York, or anywhere else, until they've been fully vetted, and have zero, zero potential connection with terrorism," he said."

So in Nov 2015 Schumer did not have confidence in BO's vetting of 18-24 mons vetting Husker thinks is OK.

But NOW he is ok with the 3 mon vetting and does not support Trump's call to make sure we know who these people are?

Do these idiots not realize what they said in the past will be brought back up?

 

[texas_ex2000]

Apparently such current whiners of President Trump's EO like Biden and Jerry Brown were against letting in Vietnamese refugees including orphans. Brown even tried to stop flights from landing at Travis.

and in November 2015 Crying Schumer advised a halt to letting refugees in might be necessary, to make sure the vetting was thorough enough.
http://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/...y-halt-of-syrian-refugees-to-the-us/274894843
"New York Senator Chuck Schumer - a Democrat - is being cautious.
"We should allow no refugee into this country, whether it's New York, or anywhere else, until they've been fully vetted, and have zero, zero potential connection with terrorism," he said."

So in Nov 2015 Schumer did not have confidence in BO's vetting of 18-24 mons vetting Husker thinks is OK.

But NOW he is ok with the 3 mon vetting and does not support Trump's call to make sure we know who these people are?

Do these idiots not realize what they said in the past will be brought back up?

LOL!

I bet no one called Shumer a Nazi.

Nazis...that's where this crap has come to.

 

[Seattle Husker]

The specific criticism about was why these countries and not other countries are accusations of conflict of interest with the Trump Organization. No one protesting or face booking or the vast majority of the pundits on CNN know about and/or care to address the creation and discrimination criteria of the VWP country list.

That's one angle of many. Still, you don't think there is a difference between the bi-partisan legislation that Obama signed in 2015 (excluding these countries from the express visa lane) and Trump's EO that put a nearly 100% stop?

The only thing I think they could have done better is to direct Customs to allow anyone in transit at the time of EO to go through normally. Maybe that was what was supposed to happen, and it wasn't communicated properly by the White House. I imagine the 100 or so people detained is hardly an extraordinarily large number compared to the number of people temporarily detained by Customs every single day. And it appears they will all be processed through by today.

Per many reports, the State Dept. (and others) weren't consulted. This ended up in the CBP not knowing the extent and including Greencard holders in the initial exclusion from entry. Aside from the 100+ that were stuck at our border, airlines began turning US bound valid Visa holders away in International airports (e.g. Cairo). Our allies, including Trump's new best friend Theresa May and Boris Johnson were offering conflicting information that they came from the State Department on their dual citizenship holders. That couldn't have been handled better? It was a major clusterf*ck in how this was rolled out. We should all be able to agree on that, regardless whether we agree on the policy itself.

What's sad for the media, is their description of this EO as something unprecedented...something fundamentally changing to our history as CNN puts is http://cnn.it/2kicc0U. Except, that's absolute rubbish. As has been pointed out, this has happened many many times, including twice by Obama, over the last 6 administrations. On the obvious contrary, Trump's EO is based on the point that IT IS, IN FACT, PRECEDENTED.

Is there a precedent? When Jimmy Carter did this for Iran there was a specific threat. Obama in 2011 was responding to additional information that tied 2 recent refugees to IED bomb making from additional intelligence and there is only an ABC article that says there was a ban, no formal confirmation from the Admin while they re-screened ~56k Iraqi refugees. The only reference to the others is JoeFan's post which has no details.

Just for everyone's information, Obama stranded over a THOUSAND Cuban migrants (who would have had full legal status) when he did his own immigration ban just 3 weeks ago. For some reason, no one protested.

Did he stop them at the border and send them home? I thought they simply had to go the same process as all other immigrants requesting asylum where they previously had a free pass. Keep in mind, that asylum process right now generally allows them to remain in the US until a judge can hear their case.

It's funny how liberals always make an excuse of how their actions are different or not the same. It's different because it's a Democrat that was in the White House.

That point would be more accurate if all of the facts were the same. That's in doubt at this time.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Unless there is something totally different in this ban if it was not unconstitutional the dozens if other times other Potuses have done it how could it be this time?

"Dozens of other times". Like many things posted here. Some conservative poster makes a claim with no evidence then its suddenly fact. I bought some apples, oranges, some shoes and a gun. I'll claim them all as fruit. Can I offer you some fruit?

 

[Horn6721]

Husker asked, "Did he stop them at the border and send them home"
Why yes yes he did

at least if this article from NYTimes is true
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/...olicy-wet-foot-dry-foot-obama-trump.html?_r=0

 

[texas_ex2000]

That's one angle of many. Still, you don't think there is a difference between the bi-partisan legislation that Obama signed in 2015 (excluding these countries from the express visa lane) and Trump's EO that put a nearly 100% stop?

No. Liberals are criticizing things all the time and they're criticizing the EO primarily as racist and unAmerican. But cronyism is THE angle when liberals are specifically criticizing the country list.

As much as you want to derail the argument, there is no material difference as it relates to the selection of the countries, which is The criticism of the list. You also still haven't answered the question, why did Obama, who's job it was to execute the law, chose those countries?

Per many reports, the State Dept. (and others) weren't consulted. This ended up in the CBP not knowing the extent and including Greencard holders in the initial exclusion from entry. Aside from the 100+ that were stuck at our border, airlines began turning US bound valid Visa holders away in International airports (e.g. Cairo). Our allies, including Trump's new best friend Theresa May and Boris Johnson were offering conflicting information that they came from the State Department on their dual citizenship holders. That couldn't have been handled better? It was a major clusterf*ck in how this was rolled out. We should all be able to agree on that, regardless whether we agree on the policy itself.

Husker, these protestors aren't out there because memos weren't sent out in time or on the correct letterhead.

~100 people across the country were detained temporarily. That's not a clusterf*ck. That's probably a relatively busier day for CBP. You and your liberal buddies are creating the cluster*ck by going nuclear meltdown every 5 minutes. CBP were also confused by the repeal of DFWF and visa holders were held, but no one covered it.

Is there a precedent? When Jimmy Carter did this for Iran there was a specific threat. Obama in 2011 was responding to additional information that tied 2 recent refugees to IED bomb making from additional intelligence and there is only an ABC article that says there was a ban, no formal confirmation from the Admin while they re-screened ~56k Iraqi refugees. The only reference to the others is JoeFan's post which has no details.

Precedent, as in executive authority and perogative as President. I thought that was understood in the context of people accusing this of being unconstitutional.

Did he stop them at the border and send them home? I thought they simply had to go the same process as all other immigrants requesting asylum where they previously had a free pass. Keep in mind, that asylum process right now generally allows them to remain in the US until a judge can hear their case.

He shut the door on over 1,000 Cuban refugees the day he rescinded Dry Foot Wet Foot. These people, who would have been completely legalized are now out in the cold.

That point would be more accurate if all of the facts were the same. That's in doubt at this time.

Of course they are...

 

[Seattle Husker]

Husker asked, "Did he stop them at the border and send them home"
Why yes yes he did

at least if this article from NYTimes is true
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/...olicy-wet-foot-dry-foot-obama-trump.html?_r=0

The Cubans were sent home? The rule is that they need to get in line with the rest of the immigrants. Isn't that what Trump advocates for Mexicans?

Of course, you are comparing the plight of the illegal immigrant to refugees/legal immigrants. Again, apples and guns.

 

[horninchicago]

Let's do like in the past and wait for something to happen before getting a handle on vetting and who is coming in. Great plan.

 

[Seattle Husker]

No. Liberals are criticizing things all the time and they're criticizing the EO primarily as racist and unAmerican. But that's THE angle when liberals are specifically criticizing the country list.

It's THE angle you want to fight. I get it. I'm not going to defend a point I don't agree with (the racist angle). There are many sentiments equally as valid. Case in point, does this actually make us safer?

As much as you want to derail the argument, there is no material difference as it relates to the selection of the countries, which is The criticism of the list. You also still haven't answered the question, why did Obama, who's job it was to execute the law, chose those countries?

Did Obama write the list? It was legislation written during a time that the Republicans controlled Congress. Let's assume that Obama and Congress agreed on the list, maybe the State/Defense dept. recommended it. What does that have to do with anything?

Husker, these protestors aren't out there because memos weren't sent out in time or on the correct letterhead.

Not sure where you're going with this.

~100 people across the country were detained temporarily. That's not a clusterf*ck. That's probably a relatively busier day for CBP. You and your liberal buddies are creating the cluster*ck by going nuclear meltdown every 5 minutes.

We KNOW that the Defense Dept., State Dept and CBP were not consulted in the implementation of the EO. That's why Priebus had to say on Sunday that Greencard holders weren't effected "going forward". If it was such a non-consequential moment, as you infer, then why did virtually every one of our allies comment? Why the need for major corporations to comment? The State Department conflicted with the Trump admin in giving guidance to our allies. State told May/Johnson that dual citizenship holders were NOT allowed in. Yeah, this was anything but smooth.

Precedent, as in executive authority. I thought that was understood in the context of people accusing this of being unconstitutional.

Sorry, I thought you were referencing the "dozens of times" this has happened before as Horn6721. I do believe this will ultimately be deemed constitutional. It may be horrid policy and even worse policy implementation but it will likely hold up in court.

He shut the door on over 1,000 Cuban refugees the day he rescinded Dry Foot Wet Foot. These people, who would have been completely legalized are now out in the cold.

I'd agree that the policy should have been better implemented. I don't think Cuba deserves any special path but there should have been a leeway of a few weeks, at least. Just another example of Obama trying to do something in a hurried manner as he walked out the door. That policy should have changed much earlier had he wanted it to change.

Of course they are...

Do you like to compare apple, oranges and shoes? Which is your favorite?

 

[texas_ex2000]

The Cubans were sent home? The rule is that they need to get in line with the rest of the immigrants. Isn't that what Trump advocates for Mexicans?

Did you read that article? From the NYTimes of all places? These people if they go back are thrown in jail by the Castro regime.

Of course, you are comparing the plight of the illegal immigrant to refugees/legal immigrants. Again, apples and guns.

This is exhausting...

 

[Seattle Husker]

Did you read that article? From the NYTimes of all places? These people if they go back are thrown in jail by the Castro regime.

They why don't the Cubans scream asylum? They get in the same line with Hondurans and others escaping violence.

 

[texas_ex2000]

It's THE angle you want to fight. I get it. I'm not going to defend a point I don't agree with (the racist angle). There are many sentiments equally as valid. Case in point, does this actually make us safer?

Yes it does.

Did Obama write the list? It was legislation written during a time that the Republicans controlled Congress. Let's assume that Obama and Congress agreed on the list, maybe the State/Defense dept. recommended it. What does that have to do with anything?

The question is absolutely everything, because whatever the answer is, IT HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION.

We KNOW that the Defense Dept., State Dept and CBP were not consulted in the implementation of the EO. That's why Priebus had to say on Sunday that Greencard holders weren't effected "going forward". If it was such a non-consequential moment, as you infer, then why did virtually every one of our allies comment? Why the need for major corporations to comment? The State Department conflicted with the Trump admin in giving guidance to our allies. State told May/Johnson that dual citizenship holders were NOT allowed in. Yeah, this was anything but smooth.

No protests over this:

http://www.local10.com/news/end-of-...ates-confusion-at-miami-international-airport

MIAMI - It's been a long wait for some families at Miami International Airport who had been expecting family members for hours, some even a full day, but it seems the elimination of the "Wet foot, dry foot" policy is causing massive uncertainty, confusion and frustration.

"They have been detained, some of them having valid tourist visas to come into the U.S. for 5 years," Ramon Saul Sanchez said. "Some of them have been repatriated to Cuba already in the last few hours."

"We spent the whole night of the 12th, and Friday also we were waiting and waiting outside to see what's going on and he didn't show up," Linares said.

But their story came to a hopeful conclusion after 36 hours. Ayala, who also has a 5-year visa, was cleared through customs.

As for Dalia Lemus' dad, and dozens of others like him, the sudden policy change leaves them in limbo as their futures are sorted out.

They why don't the Cubans scream asylum? They get in the same line with Hondurans and others escaping violence

Read that NYTime article again. Applying for asylum is not the same thing as a green card. You have to prove you're a human rights/political crime victim. Good luck getting evidence of that. As that one guy in the article said, they don't say you're in jail because you're against Castro...they say you stole a pig on the paperwork.