Travel ban gets tough questioning

Appeals court slams Justice Dept. for its ‘ abstract’ evidence

Three federal appeals court judges voiced deep skepticism Tuesday about President Trump’s temporary ban on immigration from seven majority- Muslim nations, an indication that they are not inclined to reinstate it.

The U. S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit panel pounced on the Justice Department lawyer representing the administration for insisting the travel ban was needed despite existing visa rules and restrictions.

The panel – two judges appointed by Democratic presidents, one by a Republican — expressed some sympathy for the government’s fallback position — that lawful permanent residents from the seven nations could be excluded from the ban. But the judges questioned whether they or administration officials could rewrite Trump’s order on the fly.

Judge Richard Clifton, who was named to the bench by President George W. Bush, voiced the most support for a potential com- promise. The others — Judges Michelle Friedland, named by President Obama, and William Canby, appointed by President Jimmy Carter — were more harsh in their appraisals of the ban.

The unusual hearing, with a live listening audience and judges spread from Arizona to California to Hawaii, dealt with the most significant test of Trump’s fledgling administration — one that pits the president’s authority to protect the nation against the rights of legal immigrants and refugees. A

travel ban.

Most of the incidents were perpetrated by home- grown terrorists, with only 11 involving a demonstrated connection to the seven banned nations.

Only 10 of the incidents happened on U. S. soil.

While some of the incidents involved dozens of deaths, 38 had no fatalities.

Three of the incidents aren’t even properly classified as terrorist incidents, according to the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism. They include an attack by a French national who killed his British backpacking companion in Australia after she rejected his advances.

The list was compiled after the president made his claim that news organizations ignored or downplayed terrorist attacks tied to Muslims. But the White House’s list included well- chronicled, large- scale attacks — including shootings and bombings in Orlando, Brussels, Paris and San Bernardino, Calif.

And the list contained several errors, including the date of a 2015 attack in Bosnia- Herzegovina. That attack, which killed two soldiers, was carried out by a French national who was said to have fundamentalist views, although no terror group claimed responsibility.

Nevertheless, the White House claimed the events have not received “the spectacular attention they deserve.”

The debate over terrorism coverage is the latest example of White House staffers left to justify Trump’s unfounded assertions after the fact. Trump has made widely disputed claims about the crowd size at his inauguration, widespread voter fraud and cyberattacks on the Democratic National Committee.

In releasing the list of terror incidents, White House officials said Trump was arguing that terrorist attacks have become so pervasive that they do not spark the intensity of coverage they once did. That criticism echoes complaints in some conservative websites that the mainstream media are engaged in a campaign of misinformation to play down what they call the “jihadist” nature of some of the attacks committed by “Islamists.”

InfoWars, a conspiracy- minded website with a radio show that has interviewed Trump, is one outlet pushing this line. Sample headline: “FAKE NEWS: MAINSTREAM MEDIA WHITEWASHES ISLAMIC TERROR IN BERLIN: Propagandists desperate to hide the obvious.”

“The terror list was both an attempt to flood the zone and move the goalposts,” says Nicole Renee Hemmer, assistant professor at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center. “It was an absurd list, mixing non- terror events with very small events with huge, arguably overcovered events like the Sydney cafe attack.”

That incident, in which a lone gunman took hostages in a 16hour standoff in Australia, was initially categorized as a terror at- tack but later attributed by prosecutors to “a complex, disturbed individual desperate for recognition.”

Hemmer says it’s succeeded in changing the subject: “It’s so muddied the waters that few people are talking about the actual claim Trump made, that news media are essentially colluding with terrorists by not covering attacks,” he says.

And it’s the second time in a month that Trump has attacked the media in a speech to a national security audience. He also bemoaned the “dishonest” media during a meeting at the CIA the day after his swearing- in.

The latest controversy began Monday at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa when Trump addressed the military command at the forefront of the war on terror. “You’ve seen what happened in Paris and Nice. All over Europe it’s happening. It’s gotten to a point where it’s not even being reported. And in many cases, the very, very dishonest press doesn’t want to report it. They have their reasons and you understand that,” he said.

Asked to explain those remarks Tuesday, Trump turned the subject to the coverage of him.

“I happen to know, because I’m reported on possibly more than anybody in the world. I don’t think you’ll say anything about that,” he said. “I understand the total dishonesty of the media better than anybody, and I let people know it. I mean, the media is a very, very dishonest arm.”

The White House list sent several news organizations checking their archives for quick audits of their news coverage. USA TODAY found more than 200 stories about the incidents. The attacks that went unreported involved two or fewer deaths.

After checking its archives, NBC News said it covered 57 of the 78 attacks on the Trump list, incidents that resulted in the deaths of 745 people. “By contrast,” the network reported, “the 21 attacks NBC News did not cover were smaller incidents in places like Egypt, Bosnia or Bangladesh, resulting in the deaths of just eight people, total.”

“The terror list was both an attempt to flood the zone and move the goalposts.”

Nicole Renee Hemmer, assistant professor at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center

President Trump’s executive order rests in the hands of judges at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.