Why do dumbocrats love murders so much?

[Politruk]

Wht are you going to bat for a wife beating gangster?

You are an idiot and a liar.

 

[Bn2f]

Wht are you going to bat for a wife beating gangster? Honestly, I know attorneys who make huge money doing this but you seem to genuinely care about this lowlife. It is weird.

Hahahahaha!
Had I not seen the name listed in the post you were replying to - I would have sworn you were describing trump.

 

[RoryN]

Wht are you going to bat for a wife beating gangster?

...said the Trumper.

 

[Ourforeverfun43]

Wht are you going to bat for a wife beating gangster? Honestly, I know attorneys who make huge money doing this but you seem to genuinely care about this lowlife. It is weird.

For me there is a far more important issue here. He was not afforded due process. If he was guilty then off he goes, with no further thought. Trump doesnt get to ignore the law - due process period. Thats the American way

 

[Politruk]

For me there is a far more important issue here. He was not afforded due process. If he was guilty then off he goes, with no further thought. Trump doesnt get to ignore the law - due process period. Thats the American way

Trump is actually on record as wanting to avoid that.

 

[HisArpy]

For me there is a far more important issue here. He was not afforded due process. If he was guilty then off he goes, with no further thought. Trump doesnt get to ignore the law - due process period. Thats the American way

Except he had a court hearing, AND AN APPEAL, to make his case about not being an illegal alien and not a gang member.

He lost at both of them.

So, was that due process or not? Because if it's not, then you need to explain what you believe due process would look like.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Except he had a court hearing, AND AN APPEAL, to make his case about not being an illegal alien and not a gang member.

He lost at both of them.

So, was that due process or not? Because if it's not, then you need to explain what you believe due process would look like.

And yet, SCOTUS and the Government both state he should not have been deported.....why's that?

 

[HisArpy]

And yet, SCOTUS and the Government both state he should not have been deported.....why's that?

This twists the actual facts.

He was given a hearing, and an appeal and both resulted in AN ORDER OF DEPORTATION. So it was IN FACT, determined by the courts and the government that he should be deported.

Another judge (3rd one in the due process chain - imagine that, because you claim no due process was provided...) placed a hold on that order of deportation because Garcia said that he'd be killed by rival gangs (which defeats the "he's not an MS-13 gang member" argument because Garcia ADMITTED IT to try and avoid deportation). That doesn't negate that Garcia was adjudged to be a person subject to deportation, only that he couldn't be deported BACK to El Salvador.

The government admitted that they'd made a mistake in deporting him. An admission which cost that attorney his job for failure to advocate on behalf of the government. If you want to read why; read this. That linky contains an argument on motion that Garcia was deportable anyway despite the hold order. As shown below;

While respondents challenge Abrego Garcia’s “removal to El Salvador,” they acknowledge that the “government could have chosen to remove [him] to any other country on earth,” thereby separating him from his family. Id. at 46a. Because respondents take issue only with where, not whether Abrego Garcia was removed, the harm that they claim from family separation is not implicated or properly redressable here. Respondents also allege that Abrego Garcia is at imminent risk of irreparable harm, including torture or death, “with every additional day he spends detained in CECOT.” App., infra, 35a. But both the United States and El Salvador are parties to the Convention Against Torture, and the United States is obligated not to return a person to a country where that person is likely to be tortured. See 8 C.F.R. 1208.18.

The United States has accordingly ensured that removed aliens will not be tortured, and it would not have removed any alien to El Salvador for detention in CECOT if doing so would violate its obligations under the Convention. “The Judiciary is not suited to second-guess such determinations” about “whether there is a serious prospect of torture at the hands of ” a foreign sovereign. Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674,
702 (2008); see Kiyemba v. Obama, 561 F.3d 509, 514 (D.C. Cir. 2009) “Under Munaf, * * * the district court may not question the Government’s determination that a potential recipient country is not likely to torture a detainee.”), cert. denied, 559 U.S. 1005 (2010).

It is true that an IJ concluded six years ago that Abrego Garcia should not be removed to El Salvador, due to his claims about threats from a different gang. App., infra, 11a-15a. But given the Secretary of State’s designation of MS-13 as a foreign terrorist organization in February 2025, see 90 Fed. Reg. at 10,030, the IJ’s finding that Abrego Garcia is “a verified member of MS-13” would render him ineligible for 25
statutory withholding of removal if the issue arose today, App., infra, 3a; see 8 U.S.C. 1231(b)(3)(B)(iv). So while “there is a public interest in preventing aliens from being wrongfully removed,” Nken, 556 U.S. at 436, that interest is substantially diminished in this case and outweighed by the harm that the district court’s injunction threatens to cause the government and the public.

Now that's from a brief by the government, but it shows that the attorney who made the admission did so improperly because the FACTS are that Garcia was in fact eligible for deportation despite the hold order because of his affiliation with a designated terror organization AND he could be deported to ANYWHERE other than El Salvador even under the hold order.

So, what you post isn't actually the truth but a twisted narrative designed to outrage the ignorant and uninformed.

 

[RoryN]

So, what you post isn't actually the truth but a twisted narrative designed to outrage the ignorant and uninformed.

Looks like it worked.

(Epic self-own. Thanks for the laugh, angry dummy!)

 

[Fuzzy1975]

This twists the actual facts.

Where?

The government admitted that they'd made a mistake in deporting him.

Exactly, now why did the government admit they'd made a mistake? Come on HisArpy, surely you can articulate the reason.... oh and a "legal argument" isn't a reason, only a judicial ruling is....

 

[HisArpy]

Looks like it worked.

(Epic self-own. Thanks for the laugh, angry dummy!)

Welcher.

 

[RoryN]

Welcher.

Link to where HisArpy killed the wager

Take the bet Derpy or shut the fuck up.

 

[HisArpy]

Where?

Exactly, now why did the government admit they'd made a mistake? Come on HisArpy, surely you can articulate the reason.... oh and a "legal argument" isn't a reason, only a judicial ruling is....

^OBVIOUSLY someone didn't bother to read the quoted part of the linky. Because if they HAD, they wouldn't be asking this question.

 

[HisArpy]

Link to where HisArpy killed the wager

Welcher.

Seriously rorbags, all you're doing is showing everyone how much you cheated to avoid having to pay off your bets.

You'd be better off going back to being the dead pool champ of Lit because no one is going to trust you to keep your word again.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

^OBVIOUSLY someone didn't bother to read the quoted part of the linky. Because if they HAD, they wouldn't be asking this question.

Really?

On Friday afternoon, a federal district judge in Maryland ordered unprecedented relief: dictating to the United States that it must not only negotiate with aforeign country to return an enemy alien on foreign soil, but also succeed by 11:59p.m. tonight.

The Department of Homeland Security must obey the orders of the immigration courts, or else such courts become meaningless. Noncitizens—and their U.S.-citizen spouses and children—must know that if this nation awards them a grant protection from persecution, it will honor that commitment even when the political winds shift; and if the government seeks to rescind such a grant of protection, it will do so only by means of renewed judicial proceedings accordance with the rules of procedure as set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, and the Due Process clause Case 8:25-cv-00951-PX Document 15 Filed 04/02/25 Page 14 of 1675a13of the Fifth Amendment. Plaintiff’s deportation was carried out by force, not by law; the public

Seems pretty clear cut to me.....maybe go read the "linkey" and show me where I'm wrong?

 

[RoryN]

Welcher.

Link to where HisArpy killed the wager

Take the bet Derpy or shut the fuck up.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Welcher.

Seriously rorbags, all you're doing is showing everyone how much you cheated to avoid having to pay off your bets.

You'd be better off going back to being the dead pool champ of Lit because no one is going to trust you to keep your word again.

You never took the wager, now did you?

 

[HisArpy]

Really?

On Friday afternoon, a federal district judge in Maryland ordered unprecedented relief: dictating to the United States that it must not only negotiate with aforeign country to return an enemy alien on foreign soil, but also succeed by 11:59p.m. tonight.

Seems pretty clear cut to me.....maybe go read the "linkey" and show me where I'm wrong?

The SCOTUS stayed that order. Then it said that the courts must provide deference to the Administration regarding foreign policy. This means the courts cannot order the Administration to negotiate or conduct foreign policy.

Basically, you're wrong, late to the party, and have an incomplete understanding of events.

 

[Bn2f]

Welcher.

Plagiarist.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The SCOTUS stayed that order. Then it said that the courts must provide deference to the Administration regarding foreign policy. This means the courts cannot order the Administration to negotiate or conduct foreign policy.

Basically, you're wrong, late to the party, and have an incomplete understanding of events.

So you can't find anything in the link to back this up, you're just spouting your opinion. You gave me a link which was supposed to show me I was wrong, so where in the link does it do that?

 

[Bn2f]

The SCOTUS stayed that order. Then it said that the courts must provide deference to the Administration regarding foreign policy. This means the courts cannot order the Administration to negotiate or conduct foreign policy.

Basically, you're wrong, late to the party, and have an incomplete understanding of events.

STFU.
Too early in the morning for so much bs and willful misrepresentation of the sequence of events.

 

[RoryN]

You never took the wager, now did you?

Correct - he didn't.

And he was told he'd invalidate the wager if he didn't, as shown in that link.

Case closed.

 

[HisArpy]

You never took the wager, now did you?

No, I didn't.

However, someone else DID.

And rorbags has refused to honor his bet with that person and leave for a year.

Which is called welching.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

No, I didn't.

So the bet shouldn't matter to you then.

However, someone else DID.

Link please.

 

[HisArpy]

So you can't find anything in the link to back this up, you're just spouting your opinion. You gave me a link which was supposed to show me I was wrong, so where in the link does it do that?

dudly, WTF?

Are you that dam stupid you can't click an embedded linky?

Due to the administrative stay issued by THE CHIEF JUSTICE...