It's suffering the same fate as 1.0.
Trump and his allies are smoking crack if they think that the courts will blithely ignore facts outside of the four corners of the documents.
Let's say that you run a delivery service. You have a lot of drivers, but only a couple of them are women. One of the women becomes pregnant and her doctors say that she has to go on light duty. You say that you don't have any such jobs available, so she has to take unpaid leave.
Now say that she fights this and it turns out that, over the last few years, you've had a bunch of male drivers on light duty for one reason or another, and you've managed to find things for all of those guys to do. But you say that you can't find anything for her to do. And maybe there's some statements you've made to other people disparaging women who get pregnant or women in general.
That's all probably going to come in to prove her case. You're going to lose, so warm up your checkbook.
That's what's happening here. Trump and his friends have run their mouths about wanting to ban Muslims. Rudy Giuliani the Lionmouthed, in particular, went on the air to tell the world that Trump asked him to help craft a ban on Muslims that would not be seen as a ban on Muslims. All that comes in to prove discriminatory intent.
One thing Trump can't do, it seems, is keep his mouth shut. He's talking his way into another judicial beat-down. Trump acts like a kid whose had his favorite blanket taken away from him and he doesn't like that, nosiree!
Judges don't generally like grown-up toddlers who don't respect the legal system. They find ways to show their displeasure. And, in a class call, acting like an immature putz is a good way to ensure a loss.
Cat Pawtector!
2 hours ago
1 comment:
When Molly Ivins said that guys who have made a lot of money in business have a very hard time working in a system of checks and balances, this is what she was talking about.
Trump seems to really hate being held accountable for anything. He acts like following the rules really chaps his hide.
I don't actually know anyone who thinks a Muslim ban is constitutional, and most national security experts say that it will mostly be used as a recruiting tool for terrorists.
But, as evidenced by his reaction, he thinks it makes him look strong (strong=gets to tell a lot of people what to do). This is dangerous incompetence bordering on criminal insanity.
Our own intelligence services released a paper stating that country of origin is not a reliable indicator of terrorist activity, and noting that terrorism committed by foreign born individuals here usually occurs after years of radicalization here, not overseas.
So what's the point?
That also seems to be what the judges want to know.
Perhaps if Trump wants it to succeed, he should come up with an answer to the question.
As long as he sticks to his "facts are what I say they they are" act, I don't see that happening any time soon.
-Doug in Oakland
Post a Comment