U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
January 29, 2017 10:55 AM UTC

Protests Erupt at DIA, Nationwide Over Trump Muslim Ban

  • 40 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

UPDATE: Lots of statements as the Trump administration appears to be badly losing the battle for hearts and minds. Sen. Michael Bennet set the mood soon after the announcement, with a statement we think speaks for the Democratic delegation:

“The President’s executive order on refugees will harm, not enhance, our national security and marks a significant departure from our nation’s proud history of welcoming people in need of protection,” Bennet said. “To halt completely or to shape our refugee program by religious or ethnic preferences betrays the values that have made our country strong.

“Refugees are fleeing the same violence and extremism that threatens our nation’s security and are more thoroughly vetted than any other group of people entering the United States. In addition, targeting certain religions and groups will undermine our counterterrorism efforts by stoking anti-West sentiment among ISIS followers and other extremists.

“Instead, we should focus on addressing the security gaps in the Visa Waiver Program. We should implement a stronger strategy for countering ISIS propaganda in order to degrade its ability to radicalize and recruit. Finally, we should pass the 2013 immigration reform bill, which included measures to secure our borders and enhance interior enforcement. Addressing these vulnerabilities and investing in smart security solutions will help make us safer and remain true to our values.”

And finally late today Sen. Cory Gardner is following Bennet’s lead in criticizing the order, albeit still very gently, which for us is nonetheless a significant sign that Donald Trump’s support is evaporating:

We expect the next few days to be highly eventful. Stay tuned.

—–

Your deliberately oversimplified glance at what happened in Colorado this week.

Denver7:

Hundreds of protesters gathered at Denver International Airport Saturday in the wake of President Donald Trump’s orders to temporarily ban refugees from entering the U.S.

“I am here to stand in solidarity with the immigrants and green card holder, students, professional and people who came to the United States for legitimate reasons,” said Samantha Reynolds. “Suddenly, they’re being denied access to the place they call home, with no due process, as far as I’m concerned.”

“There are four (kinds of) people in the world,” said Shauna Johnson. “There are bullies. There are the bullied. There are the silent and there are the defenders.”

“These people,” she said pointing toward the crowd, “are the defenders.”

State Reps. Joseph Salazar and Leslie Herod were on hand for the protest at DIA last night, with Salazar talking to authorities at several points to ensure things didn’t get out of hand:

After about three hours the protest at DIA ended, declaring a measure of victory after a federal judge partially halted President Donald Trump’s executive order banning travel for the next 90 days from seven Muslim-majority nations. Travelers with valid visas who were detained in the U.S. will not be removed from the country, and travelers on route to the U.S. will be allowed to complete their journeys.

The ruling doesn’t address the larger question of affected legal U.S. residents who were caught traveling abroad at the time of the order but were not “in transit,” or the overall constitutionality of Trump’s order–though it does say that in the judge’s opinion the government is not likely to prevail. Going forward, there is a serious risk to people from Iraq and Syria in particular who have earned a trip to the U.S. for collaborating with American forces. At the very least, this situation creates a major disincentive to cooperate with America going forward for residents of these nations.

Even Republican state Sen. Larry Crowder gets it, making a stronger statement against Trump’s order than many fellow Republicans up the food chain:

Compare that to Sen. Cory Gardner’s non-response this weekend via CBS4:

Gardner also says Congress will be methodical on immigration reform. He also says that Executive Action is not the way to do it.

“People shouldn’t be afraid, I don’t think, in this country. We should be proud. We should take pride in the differences of opinion in this country. But never use that or let fear interfere with making this country stronger or fighting for your viewpoints,” said Gardner.

Rep. Mike Coffman manages to state his principles a little more clearly:

“While I’ve supported heightened vetting procedures for those wanting to travel to our country, I have never, nor will I ever support a blanket travel ban for people solely based on ethnic or religious grounds.”

The only trouble is, as Denverite’s Erica Meltzer astutely observes, is nobody knows if Coffman is referring to Trump’s actual order, because:

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan supported this order, despite opposing a Muslim ban before the election, because it’s just a ban on people from certain countries. Who happen to be Muslim.

“This is not a religious test and it is not a ban on people of any religion,” Ryan spokeswoman AshLee Strong told the Washington Post.

That kind of parsing leaves Coffman’s statement open to interpretation. [Pols emphasis]

Which, we suspect based on experience, is just the way Coffman likes it.

The ban on travel to the United States from numerous Muslim-majority nations is a fulfillment of a campaign promise from Trump, much like the headlong drive to repeal Obamacare, the halt to the U.S. refugee program for 120 days, and other orders issued by Trump in his first week in office. Each of these kept promises by Trump are a fresh disaster for Democrats and the majority of American voters who opposed him, growing the sense of outrage that has fueled protests from last week’s record-setting Women’s Marches to last night’s spontaneous protest at DIA.

We can’t tell you where this all ends, but it shows no signs of stopping.

Tweet
Share

Comments

40 thoughts on “Protests Erupt at DIA, Nationwide Over Trump Muslim Ban”

  1. Forget "the gang that couldn't shoot straight." Donnie's evil little cabal doesn't even have ammo, much less understand from which end of the thing the GD bullet's supposed to exit.

    This whole anti-immigrant/anti-Muslim clusterfuck — once again, 100% the GOP’s own unforced error — is gonna end up biting them in the ass, HARD. Not to mention the vastly enhanced recruiting successes ISIS and al-Qaeda will be enjoying now thanks to the cruel and stupid actions of Deer Leedur and his hateful, racist, divisive minions in D.C and across the nation.

    Ignorant, tone-deaf, supremely arrogant and utterly clueless — that's Pee Wee's administration, and the deplorables in congress still supporting him/them. The sooner they're tarred, feathered and driven out of D.C. on a rail, the better off the U.S. and the world will be.

    (Oh, and preemptively: FU and the horse you rode in on, Comrades Impotent Peach, ACHole and Muddyratass. Quit your lying, projecting and shameful shilling for the Dark Side.)

  3. From the Votemaster today:

    "Trump has asserted that a 1952 law gives him the authority to 'suspend the entry of any class of aliens' that the president finds detrimental to the interest of the United States. However, in 1965, Congress passed a law taking this power away from the president, plainly stating that no person could be 'discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.' In a New York Times op-ed Friday, David Bier of the Cato Institute, an expert on immigration law, said that Trump's ban is clearly in violation of the 1965 law."

    Whoopsie! Deer Leedur stumbles, crashes and burns yet again! And this was only Week One. Our long national nightmare is just begun.

    The Votemaster continues:

    “In addition, green-card holders clearly have a legal right to live in the United States. That’s what a green card means: permission to live in the United States. Needless to say, Trump’s executive order is going to reach the Supreme Court sooner or later, probably sooner. While it is obviously speculative at this point, there is a real possibility that the Supreme Court will declare the ban illegal and a real possibility that Trump will defy the Court and say he has no intention of backing down. That’s where it gets dicey. Would the House impeach him? Would the Senate convict? If the answer to either of those is no, is the rule of law dead? Stay tuned.”

    So, might immigration prove to be the fulcrum of Pee Wee’s inevitable impeachment? Or will he risk ‘The Wrath of The Deplorables’ and back down?

    And just how many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Tootsie Pop, or a deeply corrupt, pro-KGB/pro-Soviet, anti-American adminstration?

  5. Man it's working great.

    Haven't had this much discussion about keeping 'Merica's borders safe in a long time.

    Frankly, I wish they added Pakistan to Obama's list of 7 countries.

    2. We truly enjoy the continuing false bravado and brave whistling past the graveyard while Pee Wee continues to burn down the Play House, ACHole. Great act. Do keep it up.

      Stiff upper lip and all that rot, eh? Never let 'em see you sweat, right? ah-hahahahahahahahaha!

        1. They're highly skilled at deception, deflection, projection, and all-around general bamboozle-ment. It's what they do; their very stock in trade. They would never have been elected, or managed to have remained so long on the government dole, without such “skills.”

          As George Constanza so famously said, when asked about beating a lie detector: "Remember, it's not really a lie…if you believe it…"

  7. Rocky Mountain Immigration Advocacy Network Attorneys were on hand at DIA yesterday to intercede for arriving immigrants. Similar groups were at international  airports all over the country.

    As Ashley Dean of the Denverite reported,,  RMIAN attorneys and volunteers will continue to monitor arrivals at DIA and help as needed. A mother traveling with an infant from Iraq was able to make it through to Denver with RMIAN's advocacy.

    For current RMIAN news, see RMIAN's twitter account.

    RMIAN is an organization which deserves your financial help and volunteer hours – according to Westword, it is one of the top ten nonprofits in Colorado that will need support during the Trump Presidency.

    I set up a recurring $10 donation today.

    The number of immigrants in detention in Colorado has nearly doubled since Trump's assuming office.
     

    From David Slack (@slack2thefuture):

    Remember sitting in History, thinking “If I was alive then, I would’ve…”

    You’re alive now. Whatever you’re doing is what you would have done."

     

  8. Senator Gardner "silent" on Muslim ban.

    All Senators were polled, and their responses entered in this spreadsheet.

    “I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” — Elie Wiesel

    1. While Obama did halt the refugee program, it did not impact green card holders, or anyone with a visa. It also did not affect refugees who had already gone through the vetting process. Trump’s travel ban barred entry to the United States to those groups, causing a chaotic situation for travelers from the seven affected countries and leading to protests at airports across the country.

      1. but on Sunday, the Department of Homeland Security said green card holders would be allowed into the country.

         

         If I recall correctly Napolitano also "re-vetted" Iraqi's already in country. Am I wrong?

        1. At a September, 2011 congressional hearing, Sen. Susan Collins asked Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano if there had been a hold placed on Iraqi visa applications.

          COLLINS: “So my question is, is there a hold on that population until they can be more stringently vetted to ensure that we’re not letting into this country, people who would do us harm?”

          NAPOLITANO: “Yep. Let me, if I might, answer your question two parts. First part, with respect to the 56, 57,000 who were resettled pursuant to the original resettlement program, they have all been revetted against all of the DHS databases, all of the NCTC [National Counter Terrorism Center] databases and the Department of Defense’s biometric databases and so that work has not been done and focused.”

          COLLINS: “That’s completed?”

          NAPOLITANO: “That is completed. Moving forward, no one will be resettled without going through the same sort of vet. Now I don’t know if that equates to a hold, as you say, but I can say that having done the already resettled population moving forward, they will all be reviewed against those kinds of databases.”

          Not seeing the difference….

          1. Negev, untwist yourself from your logic pretzel and read the news. Real green card holders, vetted for a long time, were detained at airports yesterday. Little kids and old ladies were detained. Based on what? Info obtained by vetting? Actual intelligence?

            No. Prejudice based on country of origin and religion, 7 countries, none of which have sent terrorists to the United States. Then you have white supremacist and Leninist authoritarian Steve Bannon calling the shots on national Security meetings, while actual intelligence experts like Joint Chiefs of Staff are kept out. This sudden, unconstitutional, inconsistent, chaotic Muslim ban is Steve Bannon's work.

            This is OK with you? It seems normal?

          2. Nothing wrong with vetting. Even thorough vetting. Look into terrorist ties, all of that. Most actual refugees fucking hate ISIS in all its forms. Those are the people who murdered their relatives in front of them, who expelled them from their villages, who raped and robbed them. Real vetting, careful interviews, will expose all of that, all of those heartrending stories.

            But don't make people who have already been vetted, who are legal refugees with green cards and visas, who are traveling lawfully, turn around and go back to countries of origin.  Don't turn around airplanes. Don't separate kids from parents,  helpful interpreters from their jobs, technical experts from needed work.

          3. Visas were delayed but, unlike in this case, people holding visas were not denied entry into the country, detained despite lawful permission to enter, or deported.  Obama's action regarding visas from Iraq was also based on a specific incident in which two Iraqi refugees who'd made it stateside were later accused of being bombers in Iraq.

             

            1. Once again, Curmie, stumbling with inebriation, misses the point….

              I do find it noble that you support law abiding immigrants constitutional rights, and you realize that not every Muslim is a terrorist, and that banning a certain sect does not and will not improve the safety of our nation. Your wisdom exceeds your shooting abilities, which you have already paraded as mediocre, at best. You appear to recognize that liberty supersedes security and while one president did not do enough, the other has done too much. Pretty much the exact opposite of your opinion on firearms.

              Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury.

              Can’t wait for your position on abortion. I’ll send you my notes on gun control.

              1. You're still too dumb to know when you're truly outgunned. You know nothing about my views on gun control, except that I find your pants-wetting fear of anyone taking away your guns to be comical.

                You keep thinking that banning Muslims is equivalent to banning guns. People are different than guns, no matter how much you like to pretend yours is a part of your body.

                Anything I cite, I'd have to squeeze in between your postings of things that clearly do not prove your point.

                Got back to stroking your barrel while you watch Red Dawn (the remake) for the 300th time.  

                There is nothing about you that I can take seriously.

                1. Thank you ajb, I read the article: I cut/pasted and put in quotes but full disclosure just put the bullet points:

                  So what’s the difference with Trump’s action?

                  First, Obama responded to an actual threat. Trump, by contrast, issued his executive order without any known triggering threat.

                  Second, Obama did not announce a ban on visa applications.

                  Third, Obama’s policy did not prevent all citizens of that country, including green-card holders, from traveling to the United States.

                  Now, just to be clear, I am opposed to halts, delays or bans of refugees by both presidents and do not condone or support either. I am, as you may well know, not a fan of restricting, limiting, or banning, anything.

                  However, I am not convinced that semantics detract from the similarities of the actions. The fact that Obama responded to an actual threat does not make a preemptive action dissimilar in intent to provide security to the nation.

                  Yes, Obama's actions were not announced as a ban, however Trumps temporary ban of 90-120 days produces the same results, and while the Obama administration "danced around that question",  Trump appears to call it what it is. 

                  Finally, the most stark difference in my opinion, detaining green card holders, has been lifted within a day and becomes a moot point.

                  Again, I say let them in. These are people who have rights as humans, as refugees, and as members of our inclusive American society. But to say that the two presidents have performed fundamentally different tasks on the matter does not appear reasonable to me. 

  11. Well, the real green card holders detained yesterday were allowed in today. Obamas halt was based on country of origin with default religion, which had not sent terrorists to the U.S.

    So, (pretzel) logic and simple facts indicate the actions of a white supremacist republican and a black globalist democrat are surprisingly similar, with Bannon(douch) and Napolitano’s views nearly congruent, with the most noted difference being the chaos and protests.

    Whether I am ok with or not is irrelevant, but yes, it does appear normal.

    We all are aware and agree all constitutional rights are subject to reasonable restriction, it’s just a matter of opinion on the definition of “reasonable”. So if this action is in fact considered unconstitutional, I am against it.

    1. Chaos and protests, as I understand it, resulted from the revocation of valid entry visas. 

      The religion test was endorsed by the notion that Christians from the excluded countries were not affected.

      However, the executive order does not cover countries where Trump has business interests. I'll let you draw your own conclusions about that one. 

       

    1. Good on you, Elliot. My brother in law went to Sacramento airport; some of my old friends joined you at DIA. And poor Cory Gardner is still flailing around trying to find the Democratic establishment "leader" of this grassroots, spontaneous, outpouring of protests.

      Meanwhile, our unhinged President is proposing that all of y'all are paid by Soros. You get your check yet?

    1. Damn Straight!!!  Who cares if he ignored the countries where people who have attacked America originated from because his business interests are.  And all Real Americans should be more than willing to sacrifice their liberties for security. Including security that is due to race or religion.  All those MANY protesters will one day wake up and thank the Gods for Trump who kept them safe. 

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

57 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!