Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35885779)

As long as his supporters see him trying to do the right thing by trying to get the ban in place, he'll be happy. The courts' decisions against him may also help him reinforce his anti-establishment image, which again will go down well with his supporters. It's all about the perceptions of voters and not any threats for as you say, the vetting procedures have worked well.

---------- Post added at 19:58 ---------- Previous post was at 19:50 ----------

Google headline to read full article or subscribers can use link below

Pressure builds for probe into Trump-Russia ties
The White House is facing mounting pressure to explain the relationship between President Donald Trump and the Kremlin, after Michael Flynn was fired as national security adviser following claims that he may have illegally discussed sanctions with Russia’s ambassador to Washington.
The abrupt ousting of Mr Flynn after 24 days in the White House role has intensified the focus on the Trump administration’s ties to Russia and made it impossible for the White House to convince sceptics that all is smooth inside the West Wing.
https://www.ft.com/content/d9c46b52-...8-6876151821a6

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35885786)

The Flynn stuff seems to be gaining traction. Lots of reports now that the White House knew of the contacts weeks ago but not the VP.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35885757)

Yes because Trumps Muslim ban was thrown out of court and denied ,had the judges agreed with it he would have won ,even you should be able to understand that simple piece of logic.You can be as pedantic as you like Mick pretending that because one judge initially allowed it "so not ALL the courts disagreed at all":rolleyes:(but the rest banned the ban)that just makes you look ridiculous ,you need to accept that he was wrong ,the judges said he was wrong ,you need to accept it .No doubt you will come up with more reasons why you are right and the USA's judiciary are wrong because your armchair degree is better than mine but i really can't be arsed with you and your ilk any more so i'll leave you to come up with more ways to be wrong

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35885757)

Yes because Trumps Muslim ban was thrown out of court and denied

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35885768)

Well the vetting procedure that Obama put in place seems to be working because no one from any of those countries has committed a terrorist act

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35885831)

I'm still trying to get my head around why it's a ban on travel.

As I understand it it's just a suspension for 9 months whilst the administration of the country gets reports from the agentcies involved in the vetting to ensure the correct procedures are in place and any changes to said vetting to be implemented.

That sounds like a country that has control of it's borders.

We hear that ISIS is being pushed back in certain areas. Where are they going to go join the refugee stream? The only other option is to back them into a corner and kill them all!

Europe has and is suffering due to ISIS connected terrorism, why should America also leave itself open to it?

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35885786)

The Flynn stuff seems to be gaining traction. Lots of reports now that the White House knew of the contacts weeks ago but not the VP.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35885786)

The Flynn stuff seems to be gaining traction. Lots of reports now that the White House knew of the contacts weeks ago but not the VP.

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35885872)

Which is bollocks, the so called hacking of Clinton had no real effect on the outcome of the election anyway.

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35885914)

Are we seriously expected to believe that any dodgy communication would occur in such a relatively open and discoverable manner? At the very least, any Russian involvement would insist on more hidden methods.