Trump Calls Muslim Ban 2.0 a Watered Down Version of the Original
That was, uh, not a smart strategy. Remember the original Muslim ban was knocked down for being a Muslim ban-Trump’s campaign statements that he wanted a Muslim ban make it hard to pretend this is not the intent of his EOs now.
“President Donald Trump may have just dealt a blow to his own executive order.”
“A federal judge in Hawaii on Wednesday put a temporary nationwide restraining order on Trump’s executive order restricting travel from six Muslim-majority countries. The measure was designed to stand up to legal challenges after the courts blocked an earlier version.”
“But Trump, who vowed to fight what he called a “terrible ruling,” may not have helped his own case Wednesday night. The president called the current order a “watered down” version of the first, potentially suggesting that they had the same intent.”
This was the wrong thing for Herr Trump to have said. If it’s just a watered down version of his first order, that got thrown out. So admitting that this was just a watered version of this was a huge mistake. Trump would be smart to talk less but of course we know the answer to that.
The executive order, which Trump argues will help to prevent terrorist attacks in the United States, made some key changes from the first version. It removed Iraq from the list of targeted countries and did not restrict legal permanent residents from entering the country — among other differences.
Trump and his advisors’ public statements have resurfaced in rulings so far. The ruling Wednesday cited Trump campaign advisor Rudy Giuliani’s remark that Trump wanted a way to legally implement a Muslim ban, something he proposed on the campaign trail.
It also cited policy advisor Stephen Miller’s comment that the second order had the “same basic policy outcome” as the first.”
This is what you get when you mix arrogance and stupidity together.
Here’s the ruling for the loss for Muslim ban 2.0 from the judge:
“In a blistering 43-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Derrick K. Watson pointed to Trump’s own comments and those of his close advisers as evidence that his order was meant to discriminate against Muslims and declared there was a “strong likelihood of success” that those suing would prove the directive violated the Constitution.”
“Watson declared that “a reasonable, objective observer — enlightened by the specific historical context, contemporaneous public statements, and specific sequence of events leading to its issuance — would conclude that the Executive Order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion.”
“He lambasted the government, in particular, for asserting that because the ban did not apply to all Muslims in the world, it could not be construed as discriminating against Muslims.”
This is a favorite zombie argument of Trump and his apologists.
“The illogic of the Government’s contentions is palpable,” Watson wrote. “The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed.”
P.S. As we saw in my poll yesterday, the long awaited poll results are in, and right now I’m just 11 points down vs. Peter King (GOP-NY-District 2). And the voters don’t even know who I am yet.
There is nothing more important in getting answers to Trump-Russia collusion than a Democratic House in 2019. Please donate to help me in my part of the effort to fight for a Dem House.
Thank you. We must have a Dem House. And so, we will.