This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/05/donald-trump-attack-courts-travel-ban-london

The article has changed 13 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 5 Version 6
Trump attacks Sadiq Khan again and rails at courts for blocking travel ban Trump lashes out at Sadiq Khan again in wake of London attack
(about 1 hour later)
In the aftermath of the London terror attack, Donald Trump on Monday returned the offensive over security, attacking Sadiq Khan and renewing his criticism of the US courts for blocking his attempted travel ban against people from six Muslim-majority countries. Donald Trump has stepped up his Twitter attack on London’s mayor over the response to Saturday’s terror attack, with a tirade that also appeared to rebuke the acting US ambassador to Britain.
“People,” the president tweeted, “the lawyers and the courts can call it whatever they want, but I am calling it what we need and what it is, a TRAVEL BAN!” With his latest tweet on Monday morning, Trump accused Sadiq Khan of making a “pathetic excuse” for his message to Londoners in the wake of the attacks at London Bridge and Borough Market. Hours after Khan’s office issued a clarification to say Trump had taken Khan’s original remarks out context, Trump wrote: “Pathetic excuse by London mayor Sadiq Khan, who had to think fast on his ‘no reason to be alarmed’ statement. [Mainstream media] is working hard to sell it!”
The comments drew criticism from legal experts including a supreme court lawyer and George Conway, the husband of Trump aide Kellyanne Conway and an attorney who has been considered for senior federal government posts. Trump’s initial criticism of Khan on Sunday was based on a misunderstanding of what the mayor had said. Early on Sunday morning, Khan had made a statement expressing grief and vowing that the terrorists “would not win”. Khan then added: “Londoners will see an increased police presence today and over the course of the next few days. There’s no reason to be alarmed.”
Trump also added to his widely reviled criticism of Khan, the London mayor, writing: “Pathetic excuse by London mayor Sadiq Khan, who had to think fast on his ‘no reason to be alarmed’ statement. [Mainstream media] is working hard to sell it!” A few hours later on Sunday, Trump seemed to interpret that as suggesting Londoners should not be alarmed by terrorism.
Khan responded on Sunday to Trump’s first criticism of his advice to Londoners in the wake of the attack, a spokesman saying the mayor had “more important things to do than respond to Donald Trump’s ill-informed tweet that deliberately takes out of context his remarks.” “At least seven dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and mayor of London says there is “no reason to be alarmed!” Trump said.
Trump’s executive order restricting entry to the US from Iran, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Libya and Syria – a first version included Iraq – has been blocked by federal courts in Maryland and Hawaii. The White House has appealed to the supreme court. The London mayor’s office responded by saying Khan had “more important things to do than respond to Donald Trump’s ill-informed tweet that deliberately takes out of context his remarks.”
Rulings against the order have concerned Trump and associates’ references to the order as a “ban”, and references to Muslims being its target. A ban on entry to the US based on religion – as a ban on the countries concerned would be on a de facto basis – would be unconstitutional on grounds of religious discrimination. Later on Sunday, the acting US ambassador to Britain, Lewis Lukens, put out a thread of tweets, culminating in a retweet of Khan’s statement and Lukens’ praise for the mayor.
On the campaign trail last year, Trump called for a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslims entering the US. “I commend the strong leadership of the mayor of London as he leads the city forward after this heinous attack,” the acting ambassador said.
Among the people who have insisted that Trump’s policy does not amount to a “ban” is the president’s own press secretary. In January, White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters: “It’s not a Muslim ban. It’s not a travel ban. It’s a vetting system to keep America safe.” I commend the strong leadership of the @MayorofLondon as he leads the city forward after this heinous attack. – LLukens 3/3 https://t.co/p4dDZuCpyO
Trump tweeted about his travel ban on Saturday night, as events in London were unfolding. Seven people died and 48 were injured, 18 critically, when three attackers drove a van into pedestrians on London Bridge and then attacked people with knives in Borough Market. All three attackers were shot dead by police. In more normal times, such a message of solidarity with a host mayor in an allied state would be unremarkable, but it unleashed a torrent of online abuse from Trump’s supporters, accusing Lukens of disloyalty. Some focused on the fact that the acting ambassador was offering support for a foreign official who is Muslim rather than echoing the president. There were also calls for Lukens to be replaced.
“We need to be smart, vigilant and tough,” Trump wrote then, in the first of a number of widely criticised tweeted responses to the London attack. “We need the courts to give us back our rights. We need the travel ban as an extra level of safety!” Trump appeared to have picked up on conservative commentary on Monday morning, noting that the London embassy had not had a full ambassador since January. On Twitter he blamed Democrats in Congress for slowing the process.
In response to that, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) pointed to Trump’s potential legal misstep when it tweeted: “Glad we both agree the ban is a ban.” “Dems are taking forever to approve my people, including ambassadors. They are nothing but OBSTRUCTIONISTS! Want approvals,” he tweeted.
On Monday, Trump carried on regardless, writing: “The Justice Dept should have stayed with the original travel ban, not the watered down, politically correct version they submitted to [supreme court]. However, although Trump announced on 19 January he had picked Woody Johnson, the owner of the New York Jets, to be the ambassador to the UK, Johnson has yet to be formally nominated to the Senate for confirmation.
“The Justice Dept should ask for an expedited hearing of the watered down travel ban before the supreme court – and seek much tougher version! So far, the Trump White House has made only 11 nominations for 188 ambassadorial posts. The state department is also operating without much of its senior management because of a lack of nominations.
“In any event we are EXTREME VETTING people coming into the US in order to help keep our country safe. The courts are slow and political!” Once nominations are made, the Democrats would not be able to block them on their own; the Republicans have a slight majority, which is usually enough to confirm appointments.
In response to Trump’s comment that the Justice department “should have stayed with the original Travel Ban,” a message from Conway’s Twitter account said: “These tweets may make some ppl feel better, but they certainly won’t help OSG [Office of the Solicitor General] get 5 votes in SCOTUS [the US supreme court], which is what actually matters. Sad”. Trump’s complaint about ambassadorial confirmations suggests he was well aware of the row over Lukens’ remarks when he fired off his second attack on Khan.
The Solicitor General supervises supreme court litigation and Conway, a partner at the law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, was previously under consideration for the role. With his tweet, Trump seemed to lash out at the mayor’s office’s critical remarks about his initial intervention, coupled with a routine barb aimed at the “mainstream media” (MSM) – presumably for reporting that Trump had mischaracterised the mayor’s original statement.
Conway withdrew himself from consideration for a different Justice Department post last week. He said it was “not the right time” to leave the private sector for federal government, though he continues to support the Trump administration. A spokeswoman for Khan brushed away the renewed criticism from Trump, saying the mayor was focused on dealing with the aftermath of the London attack.
The comments came from Conway’s unverified Twitter account, which he confirmed was his in an email to the Guardian. Trump’s decision to respond to the London attack first by using it to promote his immigration policies, and then by picking a fight with the city’s mayor, is likely to darken the shadow already hanging over his proposed state visit to the UK later this year.
His wife, Kellyanne Conway, told the Today show on Monday morning that the media had an “obsession” with covering Trump’s comments posted on Twitter. In the two weeks following the announcement of the visit in January, nearly 2 million people signed an online petition in the UK calling for it be cancelled. Khan himself said Trump that should not be allowed to come to London until he revoked his proposed ban on travelers from six predominantly Muslim countries. Trump is vociferously campaigning for the ban to be approved by US courts.
Neil Katyal, a supreme court lawyer, tweeted in response: “It’s kinda odd to have the defendant in Hawaii v Trump acting as our co-counsel. We don’t need the help but will take it!”
White House social media director Dan Scavino has denied reports that as the Trump White House struggles with its legislative agenda and FBI and congressional investigations into ties between Trump aides and Russia, lawyers are now monitoring the president’s tweets.