Or the fact that he calls it a ban, or the fact that he doesn't know about the separation of powers.
-
-
-
I mean, the latter is the attack on the judge. I'm docking you a point.
-
ah yeah I see, my mistake!
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@CathyYoung63 implication of case is that all preexisting restrictions are subject to judicial suspension without precedentThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
1: Robart’s “ruling” is total crap http://joshblackman.com/blog/2017/02/04/instant-analysis-nationwide-injunction-in-washington-v-trump/ … 2: Trump’s EO claims to stop bad people other rules don’t stop
@chrisgeidnerThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
...or the irony of Trump asking what's become of the country he managed to plunge into divisive chaos in a mere 2 weeks.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Or that he, once again, in contrast to his
@PressSec, is calling it a "ban". -
A travel ban, not a "Muslim Ban" as the media kept calling it and was being rebutted.
-
Except Spicer never mentioned Muslim or travel when denouncing the use of the word "ban".
-
Because EVERYONE was just calling it a "Muslim Ban".
-
In which case it might have been important to correct it in its entitety...
-
entirety**
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Like the judicial branch is a football to be passed and spiked on a whim ... The Founders would be so proud.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
both.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.