Sekulow: Anyone Want to Argue Against Trump Travel Ban After UK Attack?

Fox News - Insider ^ | 22 May 2017 10:42pm | staff

[blueplum]

American Center for Law and Justice chief counsel Jay Sekulow said there is no reason not to support President Trump's immigration executive order after the Manchester attack.

At least 19 people were killed an 50 wounded after an explosion attack at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, U.K.

Sekulow asked rhetorically if "anyone wants to argue we shouldn't have an executive order restricting who's coming into the country so we know who these people are?"

"[If] anyone want[s] to argue that case tonight, I'd like to take on that argument," he said.

[blueplum]

we're getting aweful close to the last straw.

[Gene Eric]

Has the cause of the explosion been determined?

Regardless, there are plenty of other hostilities that justify the immediate repatriation of all “refugees.”

[be-baw]

The court seem to be dragging their feet on a potentially dangerous issue.

Has there been a terrorist attack in the US since Trump became President? I hesitate to even ask, but I don’t there has.

[Helicondelta]

[blueplum]

the explosion was a jihadist blowing himself up

[Bob434]

apparently fox news wil largue because tonight they tried to claim that ‘radical terrorists’ are ‘infiltrating a religious movement’ ... in other words- it’s not muslims that were committing acts of terror, but lone wolf radicals masquerading as muslims-

Fox news appears to be in full cover-up mode and muslim apologist mode-

[ZOOKER]

I suspect this to be quashed in some way.

The explosion will be ruled to be either accidental or the act of a lone (non-muslim) madman.

And no, I won't believe it.

Just my .02

[Gene Eric]

Thanks for the info. Was following the situation earlier, but no mention then of terrorism.

[blueplum]

I wonder if Mr. “Bridges not Walls” Mayor eats his crow with gravy or chutney?

[txhurl]

What may have *really* happened is CINC forced those 7 countries not to allow any flights here, then wrote the EO,

Are we about to learn the MAN jihadi *just* flew in?

[luvbach1]

I don’t think the leftists and wimps opposed to the travel ban will be moved by yet another terrorist attack.

[GladesGuru]

Were there any justice in the world, that ‘mayor’ would be eating his meal of crow with a thick sauce of aesofoetida.

[Arthur McGowan]

Trump should re-introduce his Muslim Ban in a press conference immediately after the next Muslim mass murder in the U.S.

[Alberta's Child]

Sekulow is asking the wrong question here. The role of a judge is to make a decision based on the law, not on some emotional response to an event somewhere else in the world. The danger in this particular case is that the facts may end up working against the travel ban -- if it turns out the perpetrator was a British citizen, for example.

I think it would be absolutely appropriate, however, for someone to stick a microphone in Ariana Grande's face at her next public appearance and ask her what she thinks of Trump's travel ban.

[Alberta's Child]

Unfortunately, President Trump has probably lost all credibility on this particular issue. He just spent a couple of days getting the royal treatment in Saudi Arabia, which was the home country of most of the 9/11 hijackers.

A few people here on FreeRepublic astutely pointed out that a U.S. travel ban to defend against radical Islamic terrorists was utterly pointless if Saudi Arabia was not among the countries covered by Trump's executive order.

[MayflowerMadam]

I don’t even know why this is in the courts. The law states that the President can ban “ANY CLASS” of people from coming in, which means that he can ban Muslims. Maybe there’s an exclusion addressing religion but I didn’t see it.

[Cboldt]

-- A few people here on FreeRepublic astutely pointed out that a U.S. travel ban to defend against radical Islamic terrorists was utterly pointless if Saudi Arabia was not among the countries covered by Trump's executive order. --

LOL. Astute? What's the logic? If you can't stop most? If you can't stop all? then it's pointless to stop some?

[Arthur McGowan]

Unlike 2001, in 2017 any hijackers won’t have the backing of the President of the U.S.

[meadsjn]

Muslims are the tools and channels of terrorism.

The socialists who bring them into human civilization are the cause of terrorism.

[Alberta's Child]

If a travel ban aimed at defending the U.S. against terrorist attacks doesn’t include a nation that is the hotbed of radical Islam, then it is pointless. It is basically the equivalent of banning travel from enemy countries during World War II and leaving Nazi Germany off the list.