Donald Trump

Trump's Travel Ban Forces Elderly Green Card-Holder to Stay in Iraq. She Died the Next Day (Updated: Family Imam Says Story is a Lie, She Actually Died Before the Ban)

Her son, a U.S. citizen, had worked with U.S. Special Forces as a contractor and interpreter during the Iraq War.


Getting real now.
Richard Atrero De Guzman/ZUMA Press/Newscom

Mike Hager—an Iraqi-born U.S. citizen who fled his birth country during the first Gulf War, lived in a refugee camp for four years, and finally settled with his family in the U.S. in 1995—says his mother died in Iraq over the weekend after being denied entry back to the States, despite possessing a green card.

(UPDATE: Fox2 Detroit reports Hager's imam, Husham Al-Hussainy, says Hager's mother died five days before President Trump's executive order banning travel from Iraq and six other countries was implemented. Hager has not provided additional comment at this time.)

Hager told Fox2 Detroit that he, his 75-year-old mother, Naimma, and several other green card-holding relatives had been visiting family in Iraq, but were prevented from boarding a U.S.-bound plane at the airport, as a direct result of President Trump's executive order banning all visitors from seven countries—including Iraq. Trump's ban is set to last for 90 days, ostensibly to allow the U.S. government to ferret out "individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States."

Among his family only Hager, a U.S. citizen, was allowed to travel.

"I was just shocked," Hager said to Fox2, "I had to put my mom back on the wheelchair and take her back and call the ambulance and she was very very upset. She knew right there if we send her back to the hospital she's going to pass away—she's not going to make it."

By all appearances, Hager is the complete opposite of the secret jihadist embedded with refugees that exists in Trump's fantasies. Hager fled a war zone, became a U.S. citizen and business owner, and volunteered to work with the U.S. military during the Iraq War as a contractor and interpreter—even surviving getting shot in the back. He and his family appear to be a model of refugees, striving for and attaining the American Dream.

Hager believes his mother would have survived had she made it back to the States and received better medical care than was available to her in Iraq. In his grief, Hager is now is left to worry about if and when his nieces and nephews—also green card holders—will be permitted back into the U.S.

"This is our home. We've been here for too long, we've been here since we were kids," Hager told Fox2.

My Reason colleague Eric Boehm profiled an Iranian-American family—specifically an Iranian-born green card holder and his 66-year-old mother—who are left wondering if they'll ever be able to visit each other again thanks to the confused language and blunt implementation of Trump's executive order. Boehm writes:

Trump's immigration policy deems a 66-year-old grandmother to be such a threat to the safety of the United States that she doesn't even have the chance to look immigration officials in the eye and assure them that she's not a terrorist. It's a policy that will keep her from being able to visit her son and daughter-in-law, and may even keep her from ever looking at her grandchild.

NEXT: Trump Could, And Should, Save Vaping Industry From FDA's Costly Regulations

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.


    1. So, this whole story was Fake News then, that’s not terribly surprising.

  2. I’m fucking done. There’s blogs and National Review. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

    1. No!

      If you want to give up on Reason, I understand, but think of your fellow commenters.

    2. Just don’t read the articles Hamster! No one does!

    3. Whaddya talking about we, the commenters, made a difference!

      This grandma actually died rather than missing a few days with the grandchild that hasn’t been born yet.

    4. I’m fucking done.

      I’m torn whether to respond to this with a Willy Wonka style “Wait… Stop… Come back…” or a Stand and Delivery style “Bye Bye. We will mees you.”

    5. I totally get it, but I’m not letting these PFL scumbags chase me out. I will call them out on their lies and bullshit again and again and again and again and again.

      1. Producing more bullshit is not calling out bullshit, it’s just ensuring that we’ll be up to our knees in bullshit.

        1. Knees? I am buying a snorkel.

          1. Wet suit and rebreather man…

      2. I will call them out on their lies and bullshit

        …via the constant and enthusiastic overuse of really stupid nicknames?

    6. No one comes here for the articles. You come here for the greasy fat pigmen in the comment sections.

    7. Why? When I skipped the article and started reading the comments, I didn’t see anything too frustrating.

  3. “If only she had died waiting in line at Customs!”

    1. TRUMPHITLER would still be responsible.

    2. If she died overnight at a hospital, I doubt she was going to fare better in an airplane over the ocean, but hey, we need bodies to stand on.

      1. No, no, Trump killed her by refusing to allow unrestricted entry from hostile nations, just like G.W. Bush killed children by refusing to support gun control.

        1. Using dead people for political capital is a risky game. Sometimes you get *insert name* law, sometimes you disgust the electorate.

          1. *insert name* Laws usually involve something terrible that happened to a cute little white, middle class girl.

                1. I’m just yanking your crank, Swiss.

                  1. Oh, I know – hence only a *narrowed gaze* and not 500lbs of boiling fondue being dumped over you as you walk out of a building….

      2. Yeah, this story doesn’t really work as a worst-case scenario. It sounds like the woman was boarding a commercial flight, not a medical one, so the assumption that she would have been cured if she had just been allowed on that flight is wishful thinking. Based on the headline, I was thinking she’d been killed by terrorists, which would have been a legitimate news story (vs. a human interest story, which is what this article amounts to).

        I’m completely disagree the ban, and even I roll my eyes at most of the sob-stories being portrayed in the news and on social media.

        1. That’s the issue I have with this article. I’m sympathetic to people trying to improve their lives and in general believe capital and labor works best when it can flow to where demand is the highest, but using sob stories is just lazy. If you want to make a case, use reasoned (drink?) arguments.

            1. It’s empty after yesterday.

          1. If you want to make a case, use reasoned (drink?) arguments.

            Awww? but its so EASY to simply wave a bloody shirt grandma’s shawl. No fair.

    3. i know like seriously…this is such a bullshit story. I expected she died in a bombing or something…even than i wouldn’t feel bad. It would have been your fault for going back to a shit hole….

  4. When your entire story is about literally the 1 person that Trump has personally wronged, maybe you might consider, oh, I don’t know… a different story?

    1. There are dozens of them! Dozens!

      1. We’ll then maybe they can get together on meetup and form a little support group. Except the dead woman… aw fuck it she can come too.

        1. She can voice her disproval by registering in California and vote in the next election!

          1. Don’t know if you watched the interview Postrel did with KMW back in August (I just watched it last night), but you, Banjos, and Baby Reason got a shout out.

  5. Hager is the complete opposite of the secret jihadist embedded with refugees that exists in Trump’s fantasies.

    ISIS has actually stated they will use the refugees to embed terrorists, and Germany and France have paid the price as a result. This is hardly a fantasy. Maybe we should be cautious about repeating Europe’s mistake. If you have to lie and exaggerate to make your case, maybe you should reevaluate.

    1. And as we all know, ISIS has the ability to time-travel back to the early 90s.

      1. The terrorist attacks in France and Germany didn’t happen in the early 90s. They are current phenomena, hence the need of some caution in looking to avoid repeating their errors regarding immigration of poorly-vetted refugees. But I bet you already knew this.

        1. These people were refugees in the early 90s. Sorry you’re retarded.

          1. Oh yeah, I forgot you were an idiot troll.
            Fuck off, assnugget.

            1. “Person with facts” = “idiot troll”

              “Illiterate moron making comments” = “valued member of the community”

              1. When are you coming to Houston? I’ll buy the ticket and rent the venue.

          2. “These people were refugees in the early 90s.”

            Wait wait wait, you didn’t realize he was talking about ALL refugees?

            ” Sorry you’re retarded.”

            Lolololololol no wonder you’re a laughingstock, racist.

        2. Did you ever stop to consider that they said that to encourage countries to NOT take refugees. Does it bother you that ISIS is able to psychologically manipulate you without your being aware of it?

          1. Did you ever stop to consider that even Angela Merkel admitted that ISIS very likely has used the refugees this way? And that it is actually a reasonable strategy to get terrorists into Western countries with little scrutiny? And that thanks to people like you there is no reason for them not to go ahead and do it?

    2. I think ISIS is manipulating the west. They don’t want the refugees to have anywhere to go because inhabitants who feel they have nowhere to run make more compliant subjects.

      1. No? I mean seriously, think of what you are saying. You’re trying to say people who can’t just run away will fight less than people who can. Relief valves for the people who least want to live under your regime leaves you with a more complacent populace.

        1. I don’t think it has anything to do with having compliant subjects. They want Middle Eastern people to stay so that they can be subjugated.

          1. There’s still plenty of subjects to go around.

  6. IMPEACH THE MURDERER!!!!!!!~!~!!1!!!!1!

  7. It’s a WAR and people DIE. Get used to it.

    1. *angry old man*

  8. Yep i am done as well. I can’t take this site any more. If you are going to use sad anecdotes like this why not just completely open borders because some sob story may happen. You can use these emotional appeals to argue for complete gun ban and confiscation.

    1. Women raped by immigrants: you’re more likely to be killed by lightning!

      75 year old woman dies of natural cause: the borders must be opened!

      I’m for more open borders, but the hypocrisy is glaring.
      /yes I know reason is made of individual reporters and not a monolith.

      1. True and the lightning thing is a canard. It doesnt actually tell me anything as you can vary your chances on being killed by lightning

        Ban pools, ban cars! Free healthcare and free food and free everything!

        1. It’s also not taking into account population size. You are more likely to be struck by lightning than contract rabies from and animal. Doesn’t mean you should pet a rabid animal if you find one.


      1. I paid for the year so I’ll keep coming back. Also, I enjoy the recipe and drink recommendations.

        1. 1x premade 8-inch Pie Crust
          1x 24oz Jar (or can) of sour cherries
          5 Tbs Corn Starch
          1/2 Cup Sugar
          2 Packet (18g, 0.64 oz) Vanilla Sugar
          1 Pint Heavy Whipping Cream
          Maraschino Cherries to garnish

          Preheat oven to 350 Degrees.
          Bake premade crust for 5 minutes. Set aside to cool.
          Turn off oven, we are done with it.

          Strain the sour cherries and set aside – save the liquid.

          Put corn starch in bowl and stir in just enough of the cherry juice to dissolve it all. The resultant mixture will be close to the color and consistancy of Pepto Bismol.

          Put remaining juice in a saucepan and stir in the sugar. Put on medium heat and stir until the sugar has completely dissolved. let heat until it starts to bubble.

          Pour hot juice mix into corn starch mix and stir to ensure that there is no undissolved corn starch left and immediately return to the sauce pan on medium heat.

          Stir and scrape the bottom intermittantly. Darker, thicker material will begin to form at the bottom, This is what you want, once these begin to appear, stir and scrape the bottom constantly. The filling will thicken up quickly once it reaches the proper temperature. If kept properly integrated it will all thicken into the same heavier consistancy.

          Once there is no thin liquid left, mix in the cherries set aside earlier.

          Remove from heat and pour filling into crust. Spread evenly it should fill a standard eight inch round crust. Leave to cool.

          1. In a bowl mix the cream and the vanilla sugar. If vanilla sugar is unavailable, regular sugar and vanilla extract will work. Whip until peaks form. A stand mixer is recommended for this operation, at the very least an electric mixer should be used as doing this step by hand is difficult and time consuming.

            Once satisfied with the consistancy of the whipped cream, spread on top of the pie in a generous mound. You will only be able to use about half of the available whipped cream, so the rest can be used for topping whatever other items are available – or a second pie.

            Place Maraschino cherries on the top in a decorative pattern.
            Chill overnight and serve.

            1. Thanks. My wife just said she wanted to make a pie. We will try this.

              1. Let me know how it goes, it was fairly popular among the people who got a piece here.

              2. Did you tell her she better get her barefoot ass back in the kitchen and make one, then?

                1. No, my wife is proficient with firearms.

              3. This could be a trap. We all know Unciv’s favorite meal is a plain gruel…

                1. I got fat because I overindulged in my own cooking. Don’t gobble down the whole pie in a single sitting and you’ll be fine.

            2. PREMADE PIE CRUST????

              You’re DEAD to me! DEAD I SAY!

              1. I had an hour, and none of the other components required baking, so I took a shortcut.

                You won’t even give me credit for the homemade whipped cream?

                1. Homemade whipped cream is pretty low on the difficulty scale.

                  1. *kicks pebble*

                    I know. And a stand mixer makes it almost shamelessly easy.

                    Honestly, I used the premade crust because I didn’t have a lot of time.

            3. I’m gonna make a cherry cobbbler from scratch today.

              1. Unless I want to pawn it all off on my co-workers, I have to wait a few weeks before baking again (I am still working on losing weight)

                1. I’ve lost 10 pounds in the last month by eating less carbohydrates. Not even eliminating them entirely, just cutting back on pasta and bread and sugary stuff.

  9. She coulda been a terrist! They’re raping our wimmins and chillens! Reason sucks! Do we just let in anyone who wants to destroy our country??!!

  10. We need to ban cars cause a person got hit by one.


    1. Yeah, I am kind of cringing at this.

      1. Reason has reported in the past on how bureaucracy impacts individual lives and I think that’s important, but the publication as a whole might want to take a step back and try to strike a balance here.

        On the other hand, if they came at things in moderation or with any sense of pragmatism it wouldn’t be libertarian.

        1. If this were a case of “customs agents beat the old woman denying her entry” then it’s a proximate cause. Someone so ill that they failed to last the night was not likely to do any better spending that night on an airplane, and undermines the very argument being made.

        2. I don’t mind the personal stories when the state is directly responsible, like all the CPS stories Lenore does.

          1. Right – if some TSA pukes had shoved her around and she ended up in cardiac arrest, then you have something tied to state action/agents of the state. “Old woman dies of old age” isn’t that.

  12. “Trump’s immigration policy deems a 66-year-old grandmother to be such a threat to the safety of the United States that she doesn’t even have the chance to look immigration officials in the eye and assure them that she’s not a terrorist.” – Boehm

    False statement as the ban didn’t deem any such thing. It was a profile ban – not an individual ban

    “Trump’s Travel Ban Forces Elderly Green Card-Holder to Stay in Iraq. She Died the Next Day”
    That was unfortunate but the Reason article fails to tie it to any wrong committed.

    You sure Schummer didn’t write it ?

    I hear some tears from Fisher

    1. TIL that if you harm a collective you don’t harm the individuals who make it up.

  13. This is like the Bridgegate thing where everybody was like “ZOMG A WOMAN DIED IN AN AMBULANCE BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC”, and it turned out she died before the ambulance even got there and it wouldn’t have made much of a difference. I am against the “ban”, but these anecdotal sob stories are a bit much.

    Speaking of Bridgegate, it’s astonishing how many of my friends think Republicans are stupid assholes for investigating Benghazi but who also fully support spending as much time and money as necessary on Bridgegate. A terrorist attack that killed people vs. a few lanes of traffic being closed for a few days. Which one deserves more investigation?

    1. A terrorist attack that killed people vs. a few lanes of traffic being closed for a few days. Which one deserves more investigation?

      That depends, which of the alleged perpetrators has an “R” after their name?

  14. So she died in her homeland instead of on a foreign airplane or airport!

    Isn’t Trump wonderful. Trump = Love

  15. Correct me if I’m wrong – wasn’t the rightly offensive restriction on green card holders almost immediate rescinded?

    Aside from that, I have to agree with Florida Hipster – she died almost immediately after being rebuffed from boarding the plane, but she would have survived something like 18 hours of flying (can’t remember exactly how long it took me to fly to Iraq, but it was in that neighborhood)?

    1. It wasn’t immediate, in fact it looks like she died inbetween the time she was denied and that was rescinded. This woman should not have been prevented from coming here. But no fucking way is that the reason she died.

  16. So… post really is propter after all? I also infer Anthony has never seen a passenger die inside a plane.

  17. So what would reason propose here? The only way to prevent these sob stories is by allowing everyone and anyone in no questions asked at all.

    If it will save one life is a terrible policy to go by.

    1. Yep i am done as well. I can’t take this site any more.

      I propose that you keep your word and LEAVE.

    2. Which is assuming it would have saved her life at all, rather than her dying in transit or on reaching American soil.


    1. Is ‘being obnoxious’ what they teach on the debate teams nowadays?

      1. He wants attention not debate. Don’t bother.

  19. I can’t be the only one who read the title and immediately thought of that dumb Alanis Morrissette song.

    1. You Oughta Know?

      1. There’s nothing dumb about stalking Dave Coulier. Dude is an international treasure and the sexiest thing about TGIF.

    2. I came here to ask if it rained on her wedding day.


        Apologies to Rufus, but do Canadians know the fucking meaning of the word?

  20. I read the article.

    I’m still looking for the rational argument.

  21. Sorry Reason, I’m not going to rend my clothes because of this crass emotional manipulation which is exactly what this is.

  22. He and his family appear to be a model of refugees, striving for and attaining the American Dream.

    Lockhart: Chili, if we move Vietnamese Iraqis, they are evacuees. If they come to us to be evacuated, they are refugees.

    Chili: I’ll make a note of it, sir.

    1. I want to see fur and morning dew.

      1. Does the Tet Offensive Surge mean that Ann Margaret isn’t coming?

      2. Sir, does this mean that Ann-Margaret won’t be coming?

        1. I need to refresh the page more often

          1. Like I don’t get caught in that dilemma several times a day. No worries. Somewhat great minds, etc.

            1. The flip side of that claim is called “Groupthink”.

              It’s not as flattering.

              1. It was only two of us.




  25. Hager believes his mother would have survived had she made it back to the States and received better medical care than was available to her in Iraq.

    This seems more like feels rather than facts. I like human interest stories as much as the next coldhearted small government type, but at some point the reporting does a disservice to the subject.

    I feel for Hager – it’s tough losing your mother – but it’s dubious Trump’s executive order caused it and it’s not helpful for a journalist to make the suggestion.

    1. And the timing of her passing says she would not have made it to a US hospital.

      1. Could she have flown to Europe?

        1. maybe, but then they can’t blame Trump.

    2. it’s dubious Trump’s executive order caused it


  26. Like many others, I find this focus on the ban order to be tiresome.

    But now, I’m really trying to figure out why Reason is going wall-to-wall on this. Assuming that all the columnists really find this truly outrageous, what, exactly, are they hoping to accomplish?

    1. what, exactly, are they hoping to accomplish?

      To establish a baseline which makes their “future blowing of EVERYTHING ELSE wildly out of proportion as well” seem editorially consistent?

    2. They’re just trying to be sure they aren’t lumped in with the Deplorables. Reason has a history of writing favorably about the second amendment, so they’re already suspect.

      1. I only came here because of the strong pro-second amendment stance around the time the SAFE act got passed. These days, I get better information from the commentariat than the articles.

        1. I come here for the guns, as well… I find myself disappointed lately.

          1. Yeah guns is a bit part of why I’m here. I recognize your handle. Do you post at TTAG much?

      2. Maybe. But this number of articles on the same thing?

        And Fisher’s really good on criminal justice and his other areas of expertise. Why not stick with those?

    3. Avoid talking about Sloopy’s mom.

  27. Hager believes his mother would have survived had she made it back to the States and received better medical care than was available to her in Iraq. In his grief…

    Exactly. He’s saying these things out of grief. Unless you can provide me with a sound medical reason that this woman would not have died because green card, you’re just using her corpse as a soapbox.

    This shitty, dishonest emotional manipulation Reason, and you should be better than that.

    1. Also where is the personal responsibility. If you’re elderly and now in good health, maybe don’t travel to the third world. I’m sorry the guy lost his mom, but sometimes your choices have consequences.

    2. Next up, repealing the aca will kill thousands.

      1. Oh Gawd….please, no.

        *wanders off in a daze*

    3. What evidence in the past year or two would convince you that they’re better than that?

  28. I didn’t read the entire article, but I’m sure it eventually made the usual point about how something like this happening is a very rare occurrence, and certainly nothing to base an entire nation’s immigration policy on. Right?


  30. Bye Bye American Reason Pie

  31. Is this a joke? This has to be some kind of sarcastic Onion emulation.

  32. This blog is mainly a tabloid.

    It would have made more sense if say she got murdered. But from this it sounds like she was already dead

    1. Um, no. This is a tabloid.



  33. If she was a green card holder I agree that it was wrong to not allow her back in. No problems there.

    Now, to assume that a woman who was apparently so ill that she passed away in a day or two died because she would have been refused entry to the US is really stretching it.

    1. Yep. It isnt like American healthcare means they can prevent you from dieing

      1. I was under the impression that American healthcare is so beggared and backward that if anything her death would have been hastened by exposure.

    2. Correlation isn’t causation, except when it is. Duh.

      1. She should have died on that plane you heartless bastard!

  34. If a few grandmothers and children must die to comfort my grossly miscalculations of risk then so be it.

  35. Here’s the real scoop: based on the ads on this site, Mike Trout is dating Eric Decker’s wife. (and she’ll make your jaw drop).

    1. Who? and who?

      Also, with content like this why are not more of you using adblock?

      1. Some of us have employer-supplied laptops which we are prevented from adding software to

          1. I’m working on a plug-in called Article-block that just lets me see the comments and the pictures of hot women in the ads.

    2. If Eric Decker hits Mike Trout in the face, will his jaw drop?

    3. I heard a rumor that there’s this one neat trick that will convert 30 pounds of fat into muscle almost overnight.

      1. Sounds like material for a Downfall parody.


      1. No shit. But I think trolling us is pretty much the only thing that Weigel has left to live for at this point.

    1. Yeah, right, shreek. This is the only place on the intertoobz that anyone will even bother to occasionally verbally abuse you. Plus, you would be banned anywhere else. You’re not going anywhere, unfortunately.

      1. Stop. Fucking. Feeding It.

        It screams for attention and you validate it. I’m singling you out Hyperion because you’re one of the worst offenders. Stop giving it what it wants, you’re wasting your time and just ensuring that it will stick around forever.

        1. Hatefucking is good for both parties, you know.

          1. You tend to want the person you’re hatefucking to be at least somewhat attractive.

        2. JT, I’ve banned most of the trolls, so I don’t even see them. But for some reason, I find Tony and shreek amusing. It’s like a cat playing with mice. I can’t stop.

  37. I don’t remember Reason standing on the corpse of the Iraqi interpreter who was murdered by jihadis in Bagdad when Obama put a stay on immigrants from Iraq back in 2009. What’s the difference?



        1. A fucking dirty glitch birthed that comment. I wasn’t done writing it and not sure I’d even post it.

          1. Those dirty glitches.

          2. Those dirty glitches.

            1. Son of a glitch.

          3. So, you were going to abort it?

  38. Oh, for the love of fucking Crikey, Trump killed grandma. Is there anything this Bushhitler monster cannot do?

  39. are left wondering if they’ll ever be able to visit each other again thanks to the confused language and blunt implementation of Trump’s executive order

    Ever? The EO is quite clear that the ban expires after 90 days.

    1. But how long is that?! It feels like forever!


    1. How can we miss you if you don’t GO THE FUCK AWAY?!


    2. Nobody misses you Weigel. Not even your mother.

      1. Why do you think that’s Weigel, Mikey? You’ve never answered that.

  41. The ban on people who already had green cards was unconstitutional and wrong.

    The ability to set the rules for naturalization is an enumerated power of Congress according to the Constitution, and if those people complied with those rules to obtain legal residency and a green card, then their due process rights were violated by the executive order.

    Having said that, I’ll be very surprised if the courts don’t defer to the Commander-in-chief in banning asylum seekers (without green cards) from certain countries so long as the rest of the order isn’t unconstitutional.

    And the rest of the executive order doesn’t appear to be unconstitutional.

  42. Obama blocked Iraqis from immigrating, many of whom worked with the US and were subsequently murdered for helping us.

    I don’t remember pants shitting about that. maybe there was and I just missed it.

    1. They certainly didn’t cover it to this degree. But there was at least one ReasonTV clip about interpreters.

    2. Pants-shitting is free speech.

      Stop pants-shitting over pants-shitting.

      1. Pants-shitting is free speech.

        Stop pants-shitting over pants-shitting.


        1. That’s what makes it funny, like “never say never” or “It isn’t over until it’s over”.

          If you don’t have a sense of humor, pointing out other people’s hypocrisy isn’t illogical.

          Either way.

      2. Seems like it could be criminalized under nuisance laws. Nobody wants to share a parkbench with a pants-shitter

        1. I suppose you want them to sit at the back of the bus too… /s

          1. If there is a restroom there, sure!

      3. “Pants-shitting is free speech.

        Stop pants-shitting…”

        *scratches head*


    3. This. I also don’t recall wall-to-wall coverage every time an EO was issued by any sitting president or every time an unconsituational EO was issued by a sitting President.

      I don’t like Trump. His unconstitutional EO is egregious. Reason’s coverage of it makes it seem like Trump’s unconstitutional EOs are somehow more egregious or more important than other, previous unconstitutional EOs. Or that who’s issuing the EOs is more important than the fact that they can issue unconstitutional EOs to begin with. Or that how we stop the current person issuing unconstitutional EOs is more important how we void EOs altogether.

    4. Obama blocked Iraqis from immigrating…

      I don’t remember pants shitting about that.

      From 2011

      Visa Delays Put Iraqis Who Aided U.S. in Fear

      The Obama administration has required new background checks for visa applicants, reacting to a case in Kentucky in which two Iraqi immigrants were arrested on suspicion of ties to an insurgent group, according to American officials in Baghdad.

      Advocates say that the administration is ignoring a directive from Congress to draft a contingency plan to expedite visas should those Iraqis who worked for the United States government, especially interpreters for the military, come under increased threat after American forces are drawn down at the end of the year.

      …neither the Bush nor the Obama administration has met the targets set by Congress several years for issuing special immigrant visas.

      The numbers are stark: beginning in 2008, Congress expanded the special immigrant visa program to allot 25,000 slots over five years. After nearly four years, the government has issued about 7,000.

      …When the military leaves, he said, “it’s going to be the worst time for those people who worked for the Americans.”

      a search of the 2011/2012 reason archives yields nothing on the subject

      1. Strangely, the closest i could find was this story about medical care being provided to children Obama had droned

        (from the excellent Mike Riggs)

        Little Girl Mutilated by Obama’s Drone Warfare Comes to U.S. For Surgery

        She had to wait 3 years, and the care was provided entirely by charity groups, fwiw.

        Mike was actually on the whole “terrible things happening to immigrants” beat at the time.

        No stories about murdered ‘terps tho. (apologies to the university of maryland)

  43. But as I learned yesterday from my betters, it is proper to blanket all Muslims with collective guilt; France and Spain are properly Christian because they killed Muslims, but when Muslims killed Christians, they could not keep Spain, yet when Christians killed pagans earlier, that was a proper territorial claim, because Muslims are icky.

    I learned also that individualism and non-aggression are not valid libertarian concerns when confronted with Muslims, because those principles are subservient to the principle that teh Muslims are icky and deserving of collective guilt because someday, some Muslim terrorist might pose as a Christian refugee and kill Americans; never mind that this hasn’t happened yet. I suppose this is because the principal Muslim, that Mohamed guy, became so popular that all Muslims are secretly named Mohamed, so it really is the principal principle. But this doesn’t extend to Mexicans, who are also icky, possibly because they have terroristing murderering rapists named Jesus, no doubt a disguise like the icky Muslim terrorist refugees.

    And Reason is of course beyond the pale, and that is probably some kind of code word for not white enough to satisfy the proto-fascists who determine who is libertarian enough to ignore libertarian principles when confronted with that principal Muslim and his refugee terroristing murdering raping Mexilims cousins in disguise.

    It is all so confusing.

    1. When you are retarded even spoons are confusing.

  44. So what kind of insurance did Granny have? Or was she traveling with a bag of currency she planned to convert?

    Or, if she had survived the plane ride, was I going to end up paying for her hospital stay?

  45. So can trump have a policy on deporting every illegal cause they may kill one american at one point?

    This sort of reminds of that story katie i think name was in san fran.

    Using anecdotes to justify policy doesnt make sense.

    It would be nice if writers here would actually say what they propose. It is easy to grand stand when you dont share what you think it should be

    1. Putting the brakes on the tyrannical rule-by-imperial-decree that’s become the new normal would be a nice start. Which is more difficult if the people who are supposed to be anti-authoritarians keep finding ways to rationalize and defend the actions of the newest tyrant just because he pisses off some people they hate.

      1. Wait what? I was mocking that thinking…basically saying sob stories can be used to justify anything

        Im not on board

  46. Trump’s EO didn’t cause the woman to die.
    Trump’s EO made the pain of losing one’s mother even harder, and unnecessarily so.

    Maybe if people didn’t try to collectivize a group of people and deny each person’s individuality by assigning to each individual traits of the collective…

    1. How would you propose determining this of each individual from these countries without the use of stereotypes?? Is there some database that houses all the individual aftions of these people to make this possible?

      1. Actions. This is a problem for some libertarians. They adopt a pure and utopia type vision of the world.

        It isnt possible to determine each individual by individual without massive snooping in the first place on them otherwise you will have to rely on stereotypes which would be collectivist

      2. “How would you propose determining this of each individual from these countries without the use of stereotypes??”

        Same way an employer would conduct a search to fill a vacancy.

        Should an employer say “I’m gonna ban everyone from Chicago from getting an interview because, statistically, Chicagoans are stupid and morons”? I mean, the employer *could*, but that would be silly. What if the ideal candidate happens to live in Chicago?

        1. Immigration here from foreign countries especially unstable ones in mid east is not the same as interviewing for a job.

          And ya know the employer example given usually involves this thing called a background check.

          Not the same

          1. No it’s not identical. But it’s a similar idea. An employer wants employees that are the “best fit” for that particular company and workplace environment, however “fit” is defined in that particular context. Each individual is assessed on his/her own merit. Should an employer just blanket refuse to hire, say, New Yorkers, because “New Yorkers are rude”? That isn’t fair to the polite New Yorkers and it is ultimately a disservice to the company when they use irrational criteria to screen out potentially talented employees.

            “And ya know the employer example given usually involves this thing called a background check.”

            Yes, a background check, *on the individual*, non the individual’s group identity. That is what I am advocating. An individualized background check on each applicant.

            1. How do you do this check with people from unstable countries without much of a government keeping tabs on their profile? I doubt a lot of these folks have arrest records or places where lived and associates can talk to.

              It is not easy to do a security screen when there is little to no info in first place

        2. What is your proposal chem for inmigration?

          Open borders no questions asked ? some vetting? If some vetting how would you do this? Any limits on numbers?

          1. Each applicant should be interviewed to ascertain whether that person would be a “good fit” for residency, asylum, citizenship, whatever that person has applied for. The criteria for “good fit” should be developed by Congress and should be concrete and measurable (not just vague “loves America” emotionalism) and should be consistent with our values.

            “Any limits on numbers?”

            I don’t have a problem with some global limit, but I don’t see a reason why there should be limits on a per-country level.

            1. I largely agree with this.

              What would constitute a good fit when all you have to go off of is what they say? In other words there is no other info. Ill take your word for it isnt really good vetting imo if from a high risk area in first place otherwise will have to rely on some sort of stereotype….is it a 6 year old girl vs a 20 year old male. The latter is higher risk

            2. This sounds perfect, because background checks, especially those on people coming from foreign countries with governments of questionable stability and intent, are not only reliable and complete, but totally free.

              Couple that with all of the reviewers being Top Men, guided by what will surely be a clear, detailed, objective and fair law from Congress, and everyone in Washington will be asking themselves why they didn’t think of this low-cost, eminently fair solution sooner!

    2. Trump’s EO made the pain of losing one’s mother even harder, and unnecessarily so.

      Well then I’m sure we should favour in arbitrary emotional responses of people into whether something is good policy.

  47. Do you cry yourself to sleep every night as you clutch your Obama doll, Anthony?

    1. ROFLMAO.

  48. Alright. I’m done.

    Reason is only worth my time when it doesn’t traffic in cheap emotional crap and serve as yet another conveyor belt for the DemOp Media’s horseshit. I’ll probably lurk to see if they snap out of it, but I’m not participating anymore. And certainly not donating without a real change of direction and increase in quality.

    1. I’m with you, RC.

    2. Nowadays, I mostly come to read other people’s comments. I think that’s true of a lot of people.

      That’s supposed to be the beauty of comment sections. They get free content.

      You’ll be a big loss to and the rest of us who comment here. Hope you change your mind.

      1. Agreed. The commentariat is a big factor in why I come here (if not the key factor).

    3. Please stay, as well as Hamster. Comment, don’t read the articles. Shoot the shit. I enjoy all of the banter except for the trolls.

      1. RC Dean makes people smarter for having interacted with him.

        1. Let’s not get carried away here.

          1. He does. He always argues in good faith, whether or not you disagree with him generally doesn’t change that. He’s an asset to the commentariat.

            1. I agree that RC is a smart fellow and a decent chap, but “makes people smarter for having interacted with him”…

      2. If reading the articles here is starting to make people dumber, then that’s one hell of a contradiction.

        RC isn’t getting paid to do this.

    4. Don’t let these PFL Obama dick-sucking liberals get you down RC. You’re one of out best commenters, and not bad at all for a Canucki.

    5. Sorry to see you go man.

      Reason has gone from an every-damn-day site to a once-a-week site for me. Not that I was ever a high volume poster. You were one of the good ones.

  49. Is the implication here that she died because she was denied entry to the US? Is this really what Reason has become?

    This is eerily similar to my last few weeks reading Cracked, at one time my favorite website. They kept pushing and pushing and pushing SJW bullshit on loyal readers. The comment screamed and begged for them to go back to what they are about and stop preaching garbage to those who don’t want to listen to it. And they just couldn’t help themselves. That was a couple years ago, and I have never been back, not even once.

    1. Cracked used to be excellent-John Cheese and David Wong were great. I haven’t been there in years for the exact reasons you point out.

    2. Hell, it happened at Consumer Reports of all places, back in the early 90s. One day independent, objective, nonpolitical; the next day pushing national health care. “Please cancel my subscription.”

  50. Hager believes his mother would have survived had she made it back to the States and received better medical care than was available to her in Iraq.

    Oh NOW the U.S. has better medical care.


    1. Received better medical care on who’s dime?

      1. Yeah I thought about that too. She was apparently going to die no matter where she was. The fact that she died in Iraq might very well mean one less expense extorted from me and the other tax payers at gun point.

  51. Well this place has turned into a pathetic circle jerk of Trump apologetics.

    I remember when libertarianism aspired to be a respectable philosophy.

    1. Wow… you’re THAT old? What was reconstruction like?

      1. Tony has been trolling for years and still hasn’t figured out what libertarianism actually is, so it’s odd that he thinks he has memories of what it used to aspire to.

        Then again, Tony is remarkably unashamed of being a total dumbfuck.

      2. Tony declares that we aspired to be a respectable philosophy, after years here throwing temper tantrums and screaming “you’re stupid, I’m SMART” at anyone articulating a libertarian point of view.

    2. Well, now that we have heard the libertarian voice of reason (drink)…

    3. Didnt you used to say 6 months ago how trrrible libertarians are?

  52. That’s it, y’all. I’m done. I finally added dajjal to the filter.

    1. Oh yeah?! Well I’m adding Reason to the filter. Whaddya think about that?

      Oh, check out Tony above saying that he used to think libertarians aspired to be respectable. This is the guy that called us racist if we questioned the business licensing regimen in Detroit.

      This guy…

      1. I’m keeping Tony unfiltered, at least for now. His attacks on rationality and sense occasionally rise to the level of being good practice for arguing with real-world progs.

        1. I haven’t filtered Tony because of a noted lack of spamming stupidity.

          Actually I think this is the first comment from him I’ve seen in months.

          1. He’s been around, although he doesn’t seem to comment in more than one or two threads on a given day. I think he’s been depressed since early November.

          2. Actually I think this is the first comment from him I’ve seen in months.

            The hillary loss wasn’t an easy one to take. I’ll not fault him for that. It was probably like a death in the family.

    2. You lasted weeks longer than I did.

      1. It was sometimes amusing to watch it freak out when ignored, but its entertainment value, never very large to begin with, no longer outweighs the sheer annoyance of it.

    3. It’s better this way, trust me.

  53. There’s plenty of perfectly valid reasons to dislike Trump’s EO, but this ain’t one of them.

  54. This goddamn shit.

    Ok, I’ve been a pretty vocal opponent of the green card restriction since it’s been in effect, but this is crap. This is the kind of shit that makes your argument look emotional and spastic, not reasoned and thoughtful. You’re supposed to be better than this, I’d thought, per the title of the website, magazine, and organization.

    If you sincerely believe that an old woman who was one day away from death could have been saved via a lengthy transatlantic flight and an ambulance ride to an American ER, you should immediately contact the nearest responsible adult and ask for a padded helmet and mittens. But really, I suspect this is tugging at the heart strings bullshit. It’s shameful, and it makes it more difficult for the rest of us who are trying to make this argument on a sound basis, without resorting to logical fallacies and rhetorical tricks.

    1. I think this is the appeal to emotion fallacy by anthony

  55. Good job Anthony Fisher, your article is near unanimously (if not completely) derided as intellectually dishonest tabloid garbage. And you almost certainly chased away some long-time regular readership in posting it at Reason. I thought only Robby or Chapman were capable of achieving such widespread disdain, welcome to the sleazy journo club.

  56. Hager obviously didn’t think his mom was going to die, otherwise he wouldn’t have left her.

    Therefore it is unreasonable to blame ICE for not recognizing her medical emergency.

  57. Yippie. One more bad person dead. All hail the great leader. :sarcasm

  58. In related news a couple of hundred other people on that flight are secretly glad she wasn’t allowed on the plane, thus averting a midflight diversion to the closest airport (with requisite 5 hr wait on the tarmac) cause grandma went into medical distress….

  59. In a later report from the same source, “Imam Husham Al-Hussainy, leader of the Karbalaa Islamic Educational Center in Dearborn, says Mike Hager’s mom did not pass away this weekend after being barred from traveling to the United States. The Imam confirms that Hager’s mother died before the ban was put in place.”…..3942-story

    1. Thank you. Was about to post that.

    2. Oh. My. Delicious.

    3. “In a later report from the same source, “Imam Husham Al-Hussainy, leader of the Karbalaa Islamic Educational Center in Dearborn, says Mike Hager’s mom did not pass away this weekend after being barred from traveling to the United States. The Imam confirms that Hager’s mother died before the ban was put in place.””

      Paging Anthony Fisher! Please pick up the white courtesy phone!

  60. Anthony,
    You have been schooled.

  61. I trust Anthony will be along any minute to issue a retraction for his bullshit story, that was bullshit enough already by the time it came out that this was a fucking lie. How about it, Anthony? Care to retract?

  62. Always assume everything above the comments on H&R is fake news. You’ll be right more often than not.

    1. I think that’s a little unfair. Always assume everything above the comments on H&R is fake news, if it’s pimping OPEN BOARDERZ. Otherwise, they can do good work.

  63. What a model refugee, lying to attack the US.

  64. I think the lesson here that will be missed by the editorial staff, but not the readers…

    …was that the story was bullshit even if it had been factually true.

    Unfortunately for the editorial staff, it turned out to also be factually untrue, which should at least make them wonder for a second why they were so quick to run with such a flimsy feels-based report. And why so many other people in their field do exactly the same thing all the time.

    maybe ‘because feels-based narratives are constantly in search of bias-confirming details’? something like that.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.