I mean, ~I~ don't disagree with you. But.
-
-
This guy doesn't know what he's talking about. There is all kinds of precedent re: campaign statements
-
being used to establish illicit motive. The only thing different is that here it's the President
-
But that's only because since the framework's existed, no Pres has been openly racist. Nothing to do
-
You're missing my point. I'm saying that it will be argued the graf I cited goes beyond restating law.
-
And, then, poof, it appeared.
-
I understand your point. I'm disagreeing with it. It didn't go beyond restating law.
-
You clearly don't get my point. I am NOT saying it goes beyond. I'm saying it will be argued—incl. poss ...
-
... by Justice. That's all.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I mean, also he tweeted calling it a ban, and Giuliani's statement goes to a conversation *with* Trump
-
not just an "official's" statement about the policy in general
-
anyways all of this is premature, all of us are being premature, this is why we shouldn't even be here
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That photo...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I find it interesting that there's no mention of Lukumi
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.