Legally, the President has the power to just say 'I hereby suspend all immigration from Indonesia and Pakistan'. That would ban 25% of the World's Muslims in one go. Add India, Bangladesh and Nigeria and he'd be over 50%.

But he didn't...

Instead, he or his team chose to use a list of seven high-risk or non-cooperative nations drawn-up by the DHS over a year ago for the purpose of suspending Visa-waiver travel. That affected ~20% of the Word's Muslim population.

Indeed. So here are the facts:

1. Trump talked a lot about banning Muslims from the US.

2. Giuliani said the first travel ban was what came out of Trump asking him to implement the "Muslim ban" legally.

3. Neither the first one nor this new one is a very effective Muslim ban.

What are we to conclude from these facts?

We could conclude that, despite the insistence of Trump that he was going to implement such a ban, and a Trump insider saying that the first order was their first attempt at it, that order was not in fact intended as a Muslim ban.

Or we could conclude that it was intended as a Muslim ban, and the people responsible either don't understand that Muslims and Arabs aren't the same thing, understand but don't care because it's pandering to their supporters, or understand and see it only a first step in a process of getting a full ban in place.

Given how everyone in this circus has behaved so far, my money is firmly on door #2.