4 ms·

"Today, we learned that Trump is suspending the issuance of US visas to people from seven majority-Islamic countries, including Iran (but strangely not Saudi Ar

"Today, we learned that Trump is suspending the issuance of US visas to people from seven majority-Islamic countries, including Iran (but strangely not Saudi Arabia, the cradle of Wahhabist terrorism)." And yet, from the very source linked in the article-- "Details about the forthcoming executive orders are still unconfirmed. But here’s what we can say with high confidence." If you trust AP, then sure, it's likely that it will happen. But it's still important to draw a distinction between "has done" or "is doing" and "is expected to do". Articles like this, posted before any official announcement, are merely adding to the Trump hysteria.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
> adding to the Trump hysteria Shh, they're having a grand old time with that, don't spoil it. (They should hand the man some sort of prize for making so many people feel so righteous. I suppose a Nobel is out of consideration ...)
matt4077 10y ago
I'm not sure why AP is the subject of your scorn here. They're accurately reporting the document that was leaked, and it's in the publics' interest to learn about such actions as soon as possible. Such leaks are sometimes intended as trial balloons, for example, and the reporting may stop the worst from happening by allowing the public to react at a time where the administrations still has a face-saving way out. That may actually be what is happening with the similar leak of Trump's intended reinstatement of torture as official US policy. The uncertainty expressed in the piece does not mean that the AP is unsure if the document is real. They usually get such material from sources they know, and have experience with. They are firstly hedging against the possibility of the administration changing its mind, and – specifically for the current flurry of executive actions – there is a lot of legal uncertainty because it isn't always clear how they are to be interpreted, if they fall within the executive branches' authority, and how they fit into existing laws.
- corndoge 10y ago
  The AP was not the subject of my scorn.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago

> adding to the Trump hysteria Shh, they're having a grand old time with that, don't spoil it. (They should hand the man some sort of prize for making so many people feel so righteous. I suppose a Nobel is out of consideration ...)

matt4077 10y ago

I'm not sure why AP is the subject of your scorn here. They're accurately reporting the document that was leaked, and it's in the publics' interest to learn about such actions as soon as possible. Such leaks are sometimes intended as trial balloons, for example, and the reporting may stop the worst from happening by allowing the public to react at a time where the administrations still has a face-saving way out. That may actually be what is happening with the similar leak of Trump's intended reinstatement of torture as official US policy. The uncertainty expressed in the piece does not mean that the AP is unsure if the document is real. They usually get such material from sources they know, and have experience with. They are firstly hedging against the possibility of the administration changing its mind, and – specifically for the current flurry of executive actions – there is a lot of legal uncertainty because it isn't always clear how they are to be interpreted, if they fall within the executive branches' authority, and how they fit into existing laws.

corndoge 10y ago
The AP was not the subject of my scorn.