If you knew what was really true, then why didn’t you write what was true?
“Let’s look at the 9–0 ruling.
Eve Moran
362

You didn’t write what was true. You implied that he had been rebuffed by the court. Nothing could be further from the truth. 9 of 9 judges agreed that 99% of travelers from those 6 countries could not enter essentially completely ignoring the point that trump ever suggested it was a Muslim ban. 3 of the judges said this applied to 100% of travelers. 6 judges wanted to think about it more. All they need is for 2 of the remaining 6 to agree with the other 99% rejection and it is 100% but even if it ends up that close relatives of people could travel then he would still have proved his point. 9–0 decisions are incredibly rare. The story is actually that no judges supported the prior liberal idiot judges position that what trump said in the campaign had any bearing on the case. Those judges made up this specious idea that what people say not the law itself is of merit.

Yes, I am aware that if the court had decided otherwise or if they had not ruled how our system works. If you notice the idea that trump is some kind of dictator which you allude to in other parts of your response suggesting he is doing something in any way outside the law is pure slander. The sheet fact is the president has followed all laws and if he didnt I am 100% sure you’d hyperpoliticized judges would use virtually any excuse to try and overturn it.

This is why the left is so unhinged. You accuse all these things but there is no evidence. The evidence there is no evidence is that there are no court cases. Nothing Trump has done could possibly even get by the most lax judges idea of valid case. In the one case you guys did bring up you lost 9–0 meaning that the prior judges just made shit up.

That is the recipe for anarchy.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated John the TIB’s story.