{"id":221090,"date":"2017-02-10T14:40:00","date_gmt":"2017-02-10T19:40:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?p=221090"},"modified":"2017-02-10T17:07:35","modified_gmt":"2017-02-10T22:07:35","slug":"the-history-of-the-statute-trumps-order-is-based-on","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/02\/10\/the-history-of-the-statute-trumps-order-is-based-on\/","title":{"rendered":"The History of the Statute Trump\u2019s Order Is Based On"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: If you want another reason to really be ticked off about what\u2019s happened here with the presidential executive order, understand this: The executive order — and even the AP (The AP!) has to admit this. The executive order substantively has not been killed! Even the AP says<\/a> the three-judge “panel denied the motion for stay and set a briefing schedule for fuller arguments on the merits of the appeal. … Barring an immediate appeal to the Supreme Court, the government\u2019s opening brief is due March 3, with the states\u2019 filing due March 24.”<\/p>\n

This would be before Judge Robart. In other words, this executive order has never been argued! The substance of this has not been argued, much less decided. It has simply been stayed because the left has some hack judges who are using obstructionism here, and they\u2019re hiding behind so-called legal principle to do it. That\u2019s the thing that enrages me. Judge Robart did not even review the substance. I have people sending me the statute that this whole executive order was based on. They\u2019ve just encountered it. They\u2019ve just read the statute.<\/p>\n

\"\"I\u2019ve read it to you the past two days, and when you read the statute, you ask, “How in the name of Sam Hill can any judge stop this?” And that\u2019s the point. Robart didn\u2019t even get into this. Robart went to the, “Well, you know what? I haven\u2019t seen any terrorists come in from these seven countries! This sounds like a potential religious ban, to me. I think I\u2019m gonna stay it.” They went and found a judge who would do hackery. So the substance of the executive order has not even been argued, and yet look what people think.<\/p>\n

People think that the substance is what has been stayed and overturned. People think that Trump wrote something that\u2019s so outrageous that these mild-mannered, brilliant judges — in order to save democracy — had to make immediate moves to rein in our out-of-control, tyrant president. That\u2019s what they want people to think. That\u2019s what ticks me off about this. None of this is honest. All of this is usual trickery and lies and distortions and misdirection coming from people on the left. So the Trump executive order hasn\u2019t even really been argued because the Ninth Circuit could not rule.<\/p>\n

This is why… You know what? I mentioned this yesterday. If there were some serious judging going on here, this executive order would have been sent right back to Robart with the Ninth Circus saying, “We can\u2019t judge this. There\u2019s nothing to judge. There\u2019s no ruling here! We have to send it back. Robart, you\u2019ve gotta conduct hearings on this. There\u2019s nothing for us to review. We are an appellate court. There\u2019s no finding here. We can\u2019t appeal anything here,” which is the damn truth!<\/p>\n

Judge James Robart<\/p><\/div>\n

Robart has not yet conducted one substantive hearing on this. He just stayed it because a couple of hack Democrat governors wanted him to — and he\u2019s a hack Democrat, so he was going along with \u2019em. Plain and simple. I\u2019ll read that executive order… Not the executive order. I\u2019m gonna read the statute to you again. Let me get back to the phones. I don\u2019t want people to get backed up here too much people. We\u2019ll start in this half hour with Mike in Salisbury, Maryland. Great to have you on the program, certify.
\nCALLER: Hi, Rush? How you doing? Listen, I have a question for you: What would happen if Trump just ignored the Ninth Circuit court and implemented his executive order…? Because we have the majority. We have the Congress; we have the Senate and House of Representatives. What would happen, hypothetically speaking, if he just ignored what they said and he went ahead with it?<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, what would happen is politics, and the politics would be the media would have on-air conniptions. The media would go literally insane and nuts and they would go 24\/7, wall-to-wall with guest after guest after guest —<\/p>\n

CALLER: Well, they\u2019re doing that now.<\/p>\n

RUSH: — portraying Donald Trump as tyrannical, deserving of being impeached. “This must not stand! He needs to be out of office by the end of the week.” I mean, it would be unprecedented. You haven\u2019t seen anything. You think what\u2019s going on now is bad, if Trump would basically say, “(Raspberry) you,” and move on with this. Now, technically, though, your question is, “What can they do to stop him?”<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yeah, if he did, what could they do to him, legally? I mean, if they\u2019re fighting dirty, why can\u2019t we?<\/p>\n

RUSH: They\u2019d just continue to sue him, and you throw open… Okay, where would you sue him? They\u2019re gonna find a place that\u2019s… It\u2019s called judge shopping. I don\u2019t pretend to have the answers to something like that. There\u2019s precedent for it. Presidents have ignored judges in the past and all hell broke loose. Some presidents got away with it, and so some didn\u2019t.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yeah.<\/p>\n

RUSH: There are too many variables. I also… To do something like that, you would have to have your party on your side, too. If you\u2019re gonna tell Judge Robart, “Hey, So-Called Judge? Take a look at this,” and you go on TV and you rip up his ruling and then you reinstate the ban, well, here come the protests. And if all it takes is John McCain going on TV (impression), “I strongly disapprove! I think the president\u2019s out of control. I think it\u2019s horrible. I think this is a mistake. This is why he should never have been elected.” You\u2019d have stuff like that happening. Anyway, I appreciate the call. I understand the sentiment, too.<\/p>\n

Look, there\u2019s a part of me that would love to see it. Don\u2019t misunderstand. But there are better ways. There are better ways. Look, see, here\u2019s what can\u2019t be denied. At the ballot box these people are continuing to lose! This is what they\u2019ve got left: The judiciary and the bureaucracy. And, folks, I\u2019m telling you something. I just want to reiterate. When we had oral arguments before the Ninth Circus, whoever… (chuckles) We didn\u2019t have Sessions as attorney general so we don\u2019t know how the lawyer to argue for the president was picked, but he was not informed; he was not effective.<\/p>\n

Ditto for whoever argued before the so-called judge, Robart. Because here\u2019s Robart, “I don\u2019t see any evidence here that we have any terrorists from those seven country.” And there\u2019s only 80 examples! So you have to ask yourself, “All right, is there plenty of Obama holdovers here?” I mean, there\u2019s a story today… Trump\u2019s president, right? There\u2019s a story today. “The State Department,” is what it says. “The State Department is ushering in hundreds of refugees. The State Department\u2019s opening the border and opening doors and ushering in in this period of…”<\/p>\n

It\u2019s Trump\u2019s State Department! How the hell can that happen? So there\u2019s still plenty of potential for sabotage, because the left has had people embedded in deep, dark crevices and crannies of the bureaucracy, and they\u2019re not elected, so you can\u2019t unelect \u2019em or get rid of \u2019em. And they\u2019re there to do exactly what these judges are doing. Now, here is the federal statute. I\u2019m just gonna read it one more time. I know you\u2019ve heard this, but I\u2019m gonna read it one more time because this is why I\u2019m so livid. It is title eight U.S. Code, “Inadmissible Aliens.”<\/p>\n