Ever since announcing his initial travel ban, the Democrat propagandists in media have been leveling arguments against President Trump that expose their own would-be petty prejudices and yet more of their intellectual dishonesty.
The argument they seem most proud of goes like this: “If President Trump’s travel ban was truly about stopping terrorists from entering the USA, then why isn’t Saudi Arabia on the list? Why isn’t Pakistan on the list? We know for a fact that terrorists have come from these nations. Why aren’t they on the list?” Today, CNN’s Kate Bolduan even went as far as to suggest that France, Belgium and the United Kingdom should be on the travel ban — if it’s intended to do what President Trump claims.
The argument, like the incredible majority of Democrat propagandists who claim to be impartial journalists, is lazy and intellectually dishonest and regressive.
Three key points about the travel restrictions/bans that President Trump is asserting…
First, the countries at the center of the “ban” debate were identified by the Obama administration as being uniquely credible terror threats. It’s not like Trump and his buddies threw darts at a map. The original issuance was, and remains, guided largely by intelligence that emerged and was documented by the Obama administration.
Second, these same Democrat fake news jockeys all say “Trump said ‘Muslim ban!’ when he was a candidate. WORDS MATTER!!!1! Just because he’s not saying it’s a Muslim ban now, doesn’t mean that’s not exactly what it is. WORDS MATTER!!!1! WORDS MATTER!!!1!” It’s true that he did say “Muslim ban” as a candidate. But he abandoned that rhetoric pretty quickly, and certainly didn’t take it in to the Presidency with him. So apparently “words matter” only when those words can be used to attack and try to discredit President Trump. But other words, like those in a formally-executed and legally-binding Executive Order, those — to the Democrat propagandists pretending to be journalists — those words don’t matter at all. I mean the words in a formal declaration made by the President of the United States that’s legally asserted and notarized with a signature and millions of witnesses, those words are nothing compared to the words of a candidate who once uttered an idea on the campaign trail that he’s since abandoned entirely. Amirite, Michael Bender of The Wall Street Journal?!
Third and finally, the argument that the travel ban is flawed because it doesn’t include Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or the United Kingdom [FFS], is petty and promotes lazy prejudice. Are the Democrat propagandists who pose as journalists on CNN implying that if one person from one country commits an act of terror, then all people from that country should be suspected of similar guilt? Because that’s exactly what they’re implying. The list of countries on the travel ban aren’t based on such ridiculous, short-sighted standards. The list was identified based on much smarter, deeper tenets of intelligence. The determinations are based largely on a country’s ability and willingness to work with other nations in identifying terrorists. But if the Democrat propagandists at CNN and in the media had their way, it’d be as simple as “Well if Ahmed is a terrorist and he came from Canada, then surely all of Canada should be on Trump’s travel ban…if, y’know…Trump really cared about preventing terror in the USA.”
The arguments, like the swamp bottom-feeders in the media who make them, are lazy and dishonest and divisive and regressive. And no one else seems to be catching it or pointing that out, so I decided to with this post.