The New York Times Blows It Again, Trump Was Right Again! Apology Accepted!


On January 27th of this year The New York Times published a scathing editorial, cleverly disguised as a “news article”, trashing Trump for saying that something was rotten in Brussels.

The NYT, and the offended countries should now admit that they should have taken Donald’s warning seriously, not as a insult to their egos.

Today, they paid the price.

Here is the original NYT “article” from 1/22/2016:

LONDON — He incensed Paris and London by saying that some of their neighborhoods were so overrun with radicals that the police were too scared to enter.

He raised Scottish tempers by threatening to pull the plug on his investments there, including his luxury golf courses, if British politicians barred him from entering Britain.

Now Donald J. Trump has upset the already beleaguered people of Belgium, calling its capital, Brussels, “a hellhole.”

Asked by the Fox Business Network anchor Maria Bartiromo about the feasibility of his proposal to bar foreign Muslims from entering the United States, Mr. Trump argued that Belgium and France had been blighted by the failure of Muslims in these countries to integrate.

“There is something going on, Maria,” he said. “Go to Brussels. Go to Paris. Go to different places. There is something going on and it’s not good, where they want Shariah law, where they want this, where they want things that — you know, there has to be some assimilation. There is no assimilation. There is something bad going on.”

Warming to his theme, he added that Brussels was in a particularly dire state. “You go to Brussels — I was in Brussels a long time ago, 20 years ago, so beautiful, everything is so beautiful — it’s like living in a hellhole right now,” Mr. Trump continued.

For Belgians, already reeling from recent terrorist plots and a chronically dysfunctional government, Mr. Trump’s words were enough to induce a fit of pique worthy, in some cases, of Mr. Trump himself.

Before long, the hashtag #hellhole was gaining traction on Twitter as Belgians lashed out at Mr. Trump, deploying an arsenal of insults, irony and humor, including images of Belgium’s beloved beer and chocolate.

One Twitter user posted a picture of Mr. Trump with what appeared to be a Belgian waffle stuffed in his mouth.

“This is my hellhole,” Joseph Lemaire, a Brussels-based public relations consultant, posted on Twitter, along with several photos, including one showing the capital’s central square, the Grand Place or Grote Markt, which is flanked by stately 17th-century buildings from the city’s prosperous mercantile days.

Another Twitter user, called BerlayCat, posted an image of a gang of cats playing the drums in the Grand Place. “This is not Brussels hellhole,” the user wrote — a reference to “This Is Not a Pipe,” the title of a painting by the Belgian Surrealist master René Magritte.

A Twitter user using the name Berlaymonster (Berlaymont is the headquarters complex of the European Commission in Brussels) posted what appeared to be a modified version of the Wikipedia entry for Dante’s “Inferno.” The list of chapters showed Limbo, Lust and Gluttony. The fourth chapter? Brussels.

The hashtag #hellhole quickly gained traction on Twitter as Belgians responded with insults, irony and humor, including images of Belgium’s beloved beer, chocolate and french fries.CreditFrederik Buyckx for The New York Times

Belgium has come under scrutiny for failing to tame growing radicalization. Éric Zemmour, a French writer, recently suggested in an interview that rather than bombing the Islamic State’s self-declared capital of Raqqa, Syria, France should bomb Molenbeek, the working-class district in Brussels where several of the Paris attackers lived.

Most Belgian officials reacted with quiet defiance. “We don’t react to Mr. Trump’s comments,” the office of Mayor Yvan Mayeur of Brussels said in an email. “Have a nice day.”

Rudi Vervoort, the president of the Brussels region, said through his spokeswoman that he was surprised by Mr. Trump’s words. “We can reassure the Americans that Brussels is a multicultural city where it is good to live,” said the spokeswoman, Leonôr da Silva, listing the city’s virtues: green spaces, a tolerant culture and its central place in Europe.

Molenbeek, the working-class Brussels district where several of the Paris attackers lived. Donald J. Trump’s characterization of Belgium’s capital as a “hellhole” has upset Belgians.CreditAndrew Testa for The New York Times

 

Jean-Philippe Schreiber, a historian at the Université Libre de Bruxelles, said Mr. Trump was stirring up xenophobia. Brussels has its problems, he added, but Mr. Trump’s “hyperbolic” comments were not worthy of a response.

Indeed, Belgians could be forgiven for their sense of wounded pride. First, there is the beer, the galaxy of Michelin starred-restaurants, and a thriving design and art scene. Brussels also hosts its beloved Manneken Pis, a 17th-century bronze statue of a little boy urinating.

Channeling Mr. Trump’s provocative swagger, Mark Meirsman, a Belgian who works for the European Parliament, but who emphasized that he was writing in his personal capacity, wrote on Facebook that Mr. Trump should stand next to the Manneken Pis the next time he finds himself in Brussels (though not, Mr. Meirsman stressed, as president).

“Thank you for insulting the population of an entire European city. My city!” Mr. Meirsman wrote. “O.K., maybe it’s not the cleanest one, the best organized one but a hellhole?”

Source: Donald Trump Finds New City to Insult: Brussels – The New York Times

NO CAREER POLITICIAN, ESPECIALLY A GLOBALIST LIKE TED CRUZ, WILL FIX THIS PROBLEM! ONLY DONALD TRUMP CAN!

“Welcome To The Jungle Denmark” or “Take This Meme and Shove It!”


DanishMeme

Yes, that’s correct: what the news in the U.S. tells you about Denmark’s population being so happy truly is a load of crap, and the answers to fixing the broken U.S. social and financial system cannot be found there.

Many Danes don’t often see polls with the claims mentioned here. Just like us, they read news articles detailing national political infighting, pollution from pesticide runoff, and work-related stress, along with the small victories around the country; and mentioning polls about how happy Danes are elicits a rolling of eyes and comments about the ridiculousness of such claims.

Let’s just look at some random facts as we troll the web that most liberals, especially Bernie Sanders, ignore (by choice)…

From the official Denmark website:

The basic principle of the Danish welfare system (economy), often referred to as the Scandinavian welfare model, is that all citizens have equal rights to social security. Within the Danish welfare system, a number of services are available to citizens, free of charge. This means that for instance the Danish health and educational systems are free. The Danish welfare model is subsidised by the state, and as a result Denmark has one of the highest taxation levels in the world.

From a Danish blogger…

The Danish tax burden is one of the most heated areas of politics that you can discuss here and honestly writing about it is like trying to eat an elephant at one sitting. With income tax averaging from 58 to 72 percent, car taxes more than 180 percent and a stiff 25 VAT (value added tax) added to all purchases – it can be sometimes difficult to bring home any bacon.

Danes have to pay more for just about everything. Books are a luxury item. Their equivalent of the George Washington Bridge costs $45 to cross. Health care is free, which means you pay in time instead of money. Services are distributed only after endless stays in waiting rooms.

They’re also world leaders in alcohol and anti-depressant use.

Visitors say Danes are joyless to be around. Denmark suffers from high rates of alcoholism. In its use of antidepressants it ranks fourth in the world.

Denmark’s productivity is in decline, its workers put in only 28 hours a week, and everybody you meet seems to have a government job.

Oh, and as The Telegraph put it, it’s “the cancer capital of the world.”

Denmark’s suicide rate has been about twice as high as the United States over the past five decades.

According to the INTERPOL data, for murder, the rate in 2000 was 4.03 for Denmark, 1.10 for Japan, and 5.51 for USA.

So how happy can these drunk, depressed, lazy, tumor-ridden, pig-bonking bureaucrats really be?

 

What do they do with that free education?

Too many pursue “fulfilment” and too few the science and engineering degrees needed in well-paid growth sectors critical for the nation’s future.

Typical is 23-year-old Ali Badreldin, who is enrolled at the Royal Danish Academy of Music to become a saxophone player. “Music was always part of my life growing up so it was a natural choice,” he said.

His courses are free and he gets a monthly stipend of 5,839 DKK ($1,074 USD) in a system where class sizes are rarely limited.

The result has Denmark spending more proportionally on education than any other country in the OECD club of 34 advanced nations and getting less return..

Yet biotech firms like Novozymes say they cannot find enough engineers.

Engineering opportunities have soared in recent years in Denmark, but its youth have shunned the sector, with only one-third the OECD average contemplating an engineering career amid top-heavy enrolment in arts and humanities programmes.

With one of the highest tax rates in the world, big salaries mean mostly bigger taxes to sustain the welfare state. Many young Danes just don’t see the point of putting in years of effort into studying for a bigger salary eaten up by taxes

For example, “Lazy Robert”, or Robert Nielsen, an erstwhile student of social sciences, philosophy and Chinese, now 45, who shot to notoriety after proudly stating on TV that he prefers living off social benefits than taking a job he didn’t find “meaningful”

 

Unemployment Rate in Denmark remained unchanged at 4.50 percent in December from 4.50 percent in November of 2015, however official Denmark rates include those actively seeking employment, The more realistic rate is closer to 7.50 percent to 9.50 percent.

As opposed to all other forms of social security in Denmark, unemployment insurance is voluntary. This means you are not automatically insured against unemployment.

You can take out unemployment insurance with an unemployment insurance fund (a-kasse), which are private associations related to the trade unions and other professional organisations.

 

$20 Minimum Wage

Believe it or not, the minimum wage in Denmark really is $20 per hour. Many minimum wage increase opposers will say that it makes everything else more expensive. In a nutshell, yes, it can. However, it’s not always an immediate spark of inflation. Either way, it’s important to note that Denmark actually is an expensive country. In fact, Copenhagen is among the five most expensive cities in the world.

A meal at McDonalds in Denmark is around 65 DKK, which is $11.89 . In the United States, the same meal is $6.50.

The price of regular gasoline gallon/$USD as of today is $5.93 a new low due to the world market.

A Volkswagen Golf will run you $45,747.33! That will buy you a real car here.

Pair of Levi 501 jeans, or equivalent, $134.46.

Single parenting is common in Denmark. The country has the fourth highest divorce rate in Europe, far outstripping the UK, and the latest figures from Statistics Denmark show that 42.7 per cent of marriages ended in divorce. Like so many things in Denmark that is escalating, According to Statistics Denmark, the national divorce rate jumped by 23 percent last year when compared to the previous ten-year average.

 

Healthcare is becoming too expensive for even their extortionate tax rate to subsidize.

New rules are coming into effect which will apply to people who wish to use private hospitals versus the state run ones for certain operations. It has been a growing trend to use private hospitals for operations when the waiting times were too long at state run hospitals.

Instead of waiting up to a year for a hip operation, you could get it at a private hospital within a month. You paid the fee and got reimbursed the cost from the health service. Well that is changing.

Now many operations will not be paid for at private hospitals. There is talk of operations for knees, shoulder, eyebrows, back and weight problems. This list will probably grow as the government tries to reduce costs more and more.

Denmark’s low cancer survival rates of 50.9% are a double-edged sword, as the nation has the highest cancer rate in the world. According to the World Cancer Research Fund, Denmark has 338 cancer patients for every 100,000 residents.

Head of the Danish Cancer Society, Leif Vestergaard Pedersen, said “Some of the the most terrible stories are those about patients who have been to four or five hospitals before they come to a hospital that can make the diagnosis. By then an incredible amount of time has passed and the likelihood of effective treatment is reduced.”

 

So, why are they so happy there? I read it in a meme!

Those sky-high happiness surveys, it turns out, are mostly bunk. Asking people “Are you happy?” means different things in different cultures. In Japan, for instance, answering “Yes” seems like boasting, Booth points out. Whereas in Denmark, it’s considered “shameful to be unhappy,” newspaper editor Anne Knudsen says in the book.

Moreover, there is a group of people that believes the Danes are lying when they say they’re the happiest people on the planet. This group is known as “Danes.”

“Over the years I have asked many Danes about these happiness surveys — whether they really believe that they are the global happiness champions — and I have yet to meet a single one of them who seriously believes it’s true,” Booth writes. “They tend to approach the subject of their much-vaunted happiness like the victims of a practical joke waiting to discover who the perpetrator is.”

The glorious Denmark meme MAY have been somewhat true it the past, but it is rapidly declining in the current days. Partially due to the flaws inherant in the socialist dreamscape, but also now an added factor that the rest of the world has been facing.

Refugee immigration.

It’s off the charts and Demark is risking heading down the drain.

Some “experts” and pro-immigration politicians – like the UN chief of Migration (who is also chairman at Goldman-Sachs bank) claim that the influx of Syrian refugees and migrants from the Muslim world will benefit European economy. That is a very bold statement when you look at the statistics.

Muslim refugees (in this case from Lebanon) are the most criminal group of all. Syrians, whom the European elite wants us to believe is highly educated refugees eager to work and contribuite, is the group that is most unemployed.

Important research by the Danish state (Danish Statistics) on a very debated topic – feel free to translate and spread.

Translated from Altinget:

“Male immigrants and descendants from Lebanon have the highest crime rate of all ethnic groups in Denmark. According to the latest available figures (from 2013) the Lebanese male crime rate is index 254 – even when adjusted for age and socioeconomic status. If you do not adjust for this, the figure would be even higher. Danish men’s crime rate is index 98.

Lebanese also perform poorly on the labor market. The employment rate for 30-59-year-old Lebanese immigrants is 30.4 percent, while the employment rate for ethnic Danes is 82.3 percent.

The figures for the employment rate cover both men and women. In turn, their descendants are not included in these figures, but also when you look at the group of descendants of Lebanese immigrants, there is a significant under-employment.

Refugees and immigrants from Lebanon are a special group, since many are stateless Palestinians with growing up in refugee camps. This is not the case for the Iraqi immigrants, but the crime index for Iraqis is also high.

Among the Iraqi immigrants (and refugees), only 32.8 percent of 30-59-year-olds had a job in 2013. It is only marginally better than the Lebanese.

The crime index for male Iraqi immigrants and their descendants is as high as for the Lebanese, but with an index of 166, when adjusted for age and socio-economic conditions, the crime index for Iraqi refugees and migrants is still well above average.

 

What are they doing about it?

Danish lawmakers, this last session, passed a controversial bill aiming to make the Scandinavian country a less attractive destination for refugees and migrants.

Main points:

– New, more difficult citizenship requirements approved by the government earlier this week.

– Police will be able to search migrants’ luggage and seize cash exceeding 10,000 kroner (1,340 euros, $1,450), as well as any individual items valued at more than that amount. Wedding rings and other items of sentimental value will be exempt.

– Refugees granted a lower form of protection status under Danish law, meaning people fleeing indiscriminate violence rather than individual persecution, have to wait three years instead of one year before applying for family reunifications. Once the application has been filed, the process can take years.

– New family reunification rules that will include tougher restrictions for “foreigners who have poorer preconditions for becoming integrated into Danish society” and easier rules for “foreigners who are consider to be suitable for integration”.

– Tighter rules for obtaining permanent residency that will require foreigners to “meet a string of fixed conditions and some supplementary integration-relevant criteria” in order to obtain permanent residency. Additionally, the proposal calls for scrapping the “particularly easy access” to permanent residency for refugees.

– For permanent residency applications, Danish language requirements have been raised from Danish 1 to Danish 2, and the person must have been employed for 2.5 of the past three years rather than three out of five years.

– Tougher citizenship criteria for children who were born in Denmark to foreign parents. The proposal entails scrapping more lax requirements that were implemented by the previous government in 2014.

– More focus on a refugee’s ability “to contribute” when Denmark chooses its 500 UN quota refugees each year. These changes were introduced by Integration Minister Inger Støjberg in August.

– A proposal to apply the newly-created ‘integration benefit’, a sharp reduction in the benefits given to refugees, to even more foreigners.

– A proposal to implement recommendations from the Criminal Code Council (Straffelovrådet) to change Denmark’s current laws on treason so they can be applied to Danes or foreigners who engage in armed conflict abroad.

 

This has turned into a longer thought rant that I had anticipated, so if you want more information, Google it yourself, just avoid the “warm fuzzy” liberal sites and seek the truth.

Oh, yeah. Shove that stupid meme!

And fear this flake, fear him very much!

 

Source: Denmark vs United States Background Stats Compared and around the web.

 

Follow me on Facebook for more unfilted truth!

“Please, men of Germany. Do something!” German Teenager BANNED From Facebook For This Video..


Bibi Wilhailm is a normal German teenager who has been banned from Facebook for giving her honest, horrifying account of how life has changed since Merkel allowed Muslim “refugees” to flood Germany. As she recounts her experience, she shares that she and her friends are scared for their lives and are begging German men and patriots to stand up and fight back against these invaders.

Transcript:

Hello, you can read the newspapers but this video is about the real situation in Germany. I would like to tell everyone about this on Youtube and Facebook. I am almost 16. I would like everyone to know what is going on, what I am authentically feeling at this moment.

And I am so scared everywhere. For example, if my family and I go out together, or if I see a movie with my friends. Usually I stay at home, but sometimes I stay out until 6 pm in winter, and it is so scary. It is just very hard to live day-to-day life as a woman.

I just want to say that I am not a racist. But one day, a terrible thing happened at the supermarket. I ran all the way home. I was so frightened for my life. There’s no other way to describe it.

My aunt and her friend have said you have to grow up. Why should we, children, have to grow up in such fear? It’s not just me, my friends too. You can see on Facebook, a 17 year old attacked, a 15 year old attacked, two 12-year olds attacked, so many. It is really so sad that this is happening … because of YOU PEOPLE.

I cannot understand why they do this. But more importantly, I cannot understand why Germany is doing nothing! Why is Germany standing by, watching, and then doing nothing? Please explain, why. Men of Germany, these people are killing your children, they are killing your women. We need your protection. We are so scared, we don’t want to be frightened to go to the grocery store alone after sunset. The politicians live alone in their villas, drink their cocktails, and do nothing. They do nothing! I do not know what world they live in, but please, people, please help us! Please, do something! I cannot understand why this is happening. One day, my friend and I were walking down the street, and a group of Arabs were protesting and demonstrating. They shouted, “Allah! Allah! Allah is the one God! Kill those infidels! Allah Allah!” What should I do? Should I wear a burka? Why should I have to convert to Islam?

It’s fine if you believe in Allah, but why do you want to make everyone else believe in Allah too? I just think it would be better if there were no religion. Stop trying to make everyone else believe in your God when they do not want to.

Please, people of Germany. Do something!

When I try to tell the authorities about what has happened, they hold their hand up towards me and they say it is a problem and then ignore it. and they laugh. It is unfair. They laugh at us. They say we are dumb. They think this not only of me, but of the entire state of Germany. They don’t care about our fear. Please help us. This is an emergency! There are more and more of them.
 
One time in summer, the Muslims said we were sluts for walking outside in a t-shirt. Yes, we were wearing t-shirts. It’s summer!

Another day, I was wearing this. My friend and I purchased it while shopping hehe. If we feel like wearing it, we will wear it! And you Muslims have no right to physically assault or rape us for it! God willing, never in my life. You have no right to attack us because we are wearing t-shirts. You also have no right to rape.

The life of Germany has changed because these people cannot integrate. We give them so much help. We support them financially and they do not have to work. But they only want more babies and more welfare and more money. Men of Germany, please, patrol the streets and protect us. Do this for your women and your children. If you do that, I believe that we will have a chance.

This sort of action would be wonderful. We would be so grateful and thankful. So many thanks, if steadily, more men would come to protect us. We are so scared.

I am so upset about what Merkel has done.Thank you, Angela Merkel, for killing Germany! I have no more respect for you, Merkel. I do not think you know what you have done. You do not see how our lives have changed. Open your eyes! Is this normal? Should I, a 16-year old who is almost 17, be so scared to walk outside my house? No, it is not normal. You have killed Germany!

This is the truth. We are no longer allowed to walk outside. We are no longer allowed to wear our clothes. We are no longer allowed to live the German life. This is the sad truth.

I think it’s about time to end this video. I believe I have given a full account from a normal person. I hope others can see this and understand. I only want to end with one message:

Men, please, help your women. Help your children. I am so scared. My friends have the same fear. We are shocked that this has happened. I hope this video can convince you, and that this terrible events can stop.

 

sadfasd

Thanks, Mr. Zuckerberg.

“Ideas are far more powerful than guns. We don’t let our people have guns. Why should we let them have ideas?” – Stalin

Source: Walid Shoebat

Facebook Censors Michael Savage Post Of Muslims Protesting


When Muslims held a demonstration in London in 2006 in protest of cartoons depicting their founder, Muhammad, many bore signs warning of beheading and death for “those who insult Islam.”

Talk-radio host Michael Savage thought that amid a fierce national debate on whether or not to allow Muslims to immigrate to the United States, it would be worth considering what has been happening in Europe.

So, he posted on his Facebook page photographs of the Feb. 3, 2006, demonstration outside the Embassy of Denmark in London. The focus of protest was the publication of editorial cartoons depicting Muhammad in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. Snopes.com verified that the photographs were taken at the London demonstration, with the exception of one, which was from a protest in the English city of Luton.

Wednesday night, Facebook removed Savage’s post, explaining the social media site “determined that it violated Facebook community standards.”

Facebook has not explained why it deleted the post, but it provided a link to its “Community Standards” page, which lists “hate speech” as one of its prohibitions, along with “violence and graphic content,” and nudity.

Messages in placards held up by the London demonstrators included “Behead those who insult Islam,” “Freedom go to hell,” “Europe. Take some lessons from 9/11″ and “Be prepared for the real Holocaust.”

The Facebook post on Savage’s page included text from an email that has circulated for many years:

 Why would anyone think that we should be at war with such nice, peaceful Muslims?!

You need to forward this one to everyone! These pictures tell it all!

Muslims have stated that England will be the first country they take over!

These are pictures not shown on American TV or in American Newspapers – WHY?!

They were forwarded by a Canadian friend who thought ALL Americans ought to know!

The question is whether the Facebook violation was because of the hate speech exhibited by the Muslim protesters in the photographs or because of the act of posting the photographs and the text.

Savage suspects it was the latter.

He noted that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey praised Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg Thursday for Zuckerberg’s Facebook post Wednesday in support of Muslims who fear “they will be persecuted for the actions of others.”

“What more needs to be said? Erdogan is a dictator who censors all critics, banishes opposition politicians and arrests journalists,” Savage told WND.

“It would be like Hitler congratulating an American media mogul for saying, ‘Not all Germans are Nazis, and Hitler is misunderstood,’” he said.

“How can another Jewish liberal billionaire be committing cultural suicide? Why are liberal Jews so blind to their own survival? Why do they always side with their enemies?”

Savage said it’s only a matter of time before “any and all criticisms of Islam will be considered hate speech by Zuckerberg and the Obama goons.”

“I am banned in Britain and soon banned from Facebook?”

In 2009, Savage was banned from entering the U.K. by Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s government, which lumped him together with Muslim jihadists and leaders of racist groups for “seeking to provoke others to serious criminal acts and fostering hatred,” as WND reported.

Last week, Attorney General Loretta Lynch told a Muslim activist group that she would prosecute anti-Muslim rhetoric that “edges toward violence,” sparking widespread criticism that prompted her to walk back the remarks.

This week, the British government posted online a citizens’ petition calling to ban Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump from entering the United Kingdom.

In May 2009, then-British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced that Savage was on a list of 16 people banned from entry because the government believed their views might provoke violence. Smith said it was “important that people understand the sorts of values and sorts of standards that we have here, the fact that it’s a privilege to come and the sort of things that mean you won’t be welcome in this country.”

A year later, Prime Minister David Cameron’s new government informed Savage it would continue the ban unless he repudiated statements made on his broadcasts that were deemed a threat to public security.

Again, the government didn’t cite any statements.

See Michael Savage’s selection of no-nonsense books in the WND Superstore!

 

 

Experts Agree Trump Muslim Ban Constitutional and Warranted…


Constitution-1

While the liberal media has condemned Donald Trump’s call for a ban on Muslim immigrants as “disqualifying” and “toxic,” former President Barack Obama may have only himself to blame as President Trump succeeds in putting his plan, or some version of it, into action.

In his efforts to work around Congress, Obama has made the aggressive use of executive power, particularly on immigration, an increasingly effective and politically accepted presidential tool. While legal scholars are divided on whether Obama has accelerated or merely continued a drift of power toward the executive branch, there’s little debate that he’s paved a path for his successor.

Depending on who that is, many Obama backers could rue the day they cheered his “pen-and-phone” campaign to get past Republican opposition in Congress. The unilateral steps he took to raise environmental standards, tighten gun control measures and ease the threat of deportation for millions of immigrants in the U.S. illegally, serves as precedent for moves they won’t cheer.

“You know the great thing about executive orders, I don’t have to go back to Congress,” Trump said recently at rally in Manassas, Va.

“We’re unsigning a lot of executive orders, especially his order that basically lets anybody they want just pour into our country,” Trump said. “That’s going to end.”

And Trump’s plan is backed by much precedent and long standing legal definitions.

Under U.S. Code, the president does have the statutory authority to keep anyone out of the country, for any reason he thinks best. Per 8 USC §1182:

“Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

Any such blanket action based on a person’s religion would be unconstitutional if applied to U.S. citizens, scholars agree.

But courts have given Congress and the president wide discretion when it comes to immigration.

No less an authority than Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has said it is naive to think the country would never again resort to such harsh measures, particularly during wartime.

“That’s what was going on – the panic about the war and the invasion of the Pacific and whatnot. That’s what happens,” Scalia said on a visit to Hawaii in 2014, describing the mood in America following Pearl Harbor that led to the internment camps. “It was wrong, but I would not be surprised to see it happen again, in time of war. It’s no justification, but it is the reality.”

“I don’t actually think it would be unconstitutional. The president has a huge amount of discretion under the immigration statute,” said Eric Posner, a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago. The same protections given citizens do not apply to people who are neither American nor in the United States, Posner said.

Posner pointed out that the Supreme Court “has held consistently, for more than a century, that constitutional protections that normally benefit Americans and people on American territory do not apply when Congress decides who to admit and who to exclude as immigrants or other entrants.”

He said while the court hasn’t ruled specifically on religious discrimination, “it has also never given the slightest indication that religion would be exempt from this general rule.”

Courts have upheld the denial of visas to enter the country to Marxists and people born to parents who were not married, among many categories. The Supreme Court has never struck down an immigration classification on the basis of race or any other reason, said Temple University immigration expert Peter Spiro.

We asked Stephen H. Legomsky, of Washington University School of Law, who was chief counsel at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency under President Barack Obama from 2011 to 2013. Most recently the professor served briefly as senior counselor to the Secretary of Homeland Security on immigration issues.

He referred to the plenary power doctrine that “states that the courts should show exceptional deference to Congress when it legislates in the field of immigration,” Mr. Legomsky told Law Blog. It was first laid down by the Supreme Court in the late 1880s when justices upheld the Chinese Exclusion Act, a federal law that suspended immigration of Chinese laborers.

Prof. Eugene Volokh of UCLA—one of the top First Amendment scholars in America—says about this proposed ban that there are no limits on Congress’s power over immigration, per the Supreme Court’s earlier cases (even though he also called Trump’s proposed policy an “abomination”). Prof. Eric Posner of the University of Chicago is less confident in predicting an outcome, but says the ban would probably be upheld by the courts.

There are legal challenges that have been raised by some lawyers, but all of these fail. Some say it violates the Religious Test Clause of the Constitution, but that says only that people seeking federal office cannot be denied public office because of their religion.

In fact, the Legal Information Institute at Cornell cites this provision of federal law:

Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

“I would add that, in Kleindienst v. Mandel (1972), the Supreme Court applied the ‘plenary power doctrine’ to the exclusion of people based on their political beliefs, despite the Free Speech Clause. The cases that Posner is referring to, together with Kleindienst, suggest that the exclusion of people based on their religious beliefs is likewise constitutional.”

He noted that, “at this point, the precedents counsel in favor of the constitutionality of such a rule.”

Posner pointed out there even is a precedent for Trump’s idea.

“In 1891, Congress passed a statute that made inadmissible people who practice polygamy (directed, at the time, at Mormons), and in 1907 extended this ban to people who ‘who admit their belief in the practice of polygamy.’ While Congress later repealed the latter provision (the former seems to be still on the books), no court – as far I know – ruled it unconstitutional.”

He said it’s clear, “The plenary power doctrine is universally loathed by scholars and some have argued that it is effectively a dead letter. But any honest answer to a journalist’s question about whether Trump’s plan to ban Muslim immigration is unconstitutional should start with the plenary powers doctrine, and observe that it would be an uphill battle to persuade the Supreme Court to abandon a century of precedent.”

He said it’s unfortunate that scholars – “who certainly know better” – are telling journalists who don’t like Trump’s ideas what they want to hear.

“Not everything that is stupid or offensive is unconstitutional,” he said.

The high court has reaffirmed the doctrine in a 1972 ruling denying entry to a self-described “revolutionary Marxist” from Belgium who sought a temporary visa.

UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh told Law Blog that Mr. Trump’s plan “may be a very bad idea, but under the plenary power doctrine it may very well be constitutional.”

It doesn’t appear that Mr. Trump would have to get congressional approval before advancing the Muslim ban, said Temple University law professor Peter Spiro. Congress has already given the president broad powers to suspend the entry of “any class of aliens as immigrants” if their entry would “be detrimental” to the nation’s interests.

 

Please Follow: The Roediger Report

RR Trump Constitution

The America First Network on Facebook!

 

Join the Trump movement go to our Facebook Group:

Deplorable Us For Trump!