Kilmar Abrego Garcia & Trump El Salvador deportations thread.

[TimHauck 2,905]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

Don't care.  Let's stop with the due process crap.  Why don't you call out the pigeon focker for continuing to bring it up when even you acknowledge he got it?

I ignore a lot of @RLLD’s ramblings as well as the people that fall into his word salad traps, was @squistion talking about Abrego Garcia specifically?  I thought most of his recent comments were speaking generally.

[TimHauck 2,905]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

Don't care.  Let's stop with the due process crap.  Why don't you call out the pigeon focker for continuing to bring it up when even you acknowledge he got it?

Also, weird that you don’t care about posters saying people don’t have a right to due process.  That seems like a pretty big deal IMO.

But hey, at least @Meglamaniac is finally providing some actual thoughts to a thread.  Too bad they’re terrible.

[RLLD 4,247]

9 minutes ago, squistion said:

Who embrace simple common sense, like the notion that everyone is entitled to due process under the Constitution? 

 

Shout that sh!t out my man!    Love it.....

[squistion 2,216]

Just now, TimHauck said:

I ignore a lot of @RLLD’s ramblings as well as the people that fall into his word salad traps, was @squistion talking about Abrego Garcia specifically?  I thought most of his recent comments were speaking generally.

Yes I was talking about Garcia, who was not accorded due process when he was first deported to El Salvador (which is why we have this thread). per Google:

a judge did rule in his favor regarding his wrongful deportation, preventing his immediate deportation and ordering his return to the US, it was a temporary measure to ensure due process.

[Meglamaniac 529]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

Also, weird that you don’t care about posters saying people don’t have a right to due process.  That seems like a pretty big deal IMO.

But hey, at least @Meglamaniac is finally providing some actual thoughts to a thread.  Too bad they’re terrible.

Hey last word guy, tell exactly what it means to be under the jurisdiction of the United States”

This should be fun

 

 

 

 

[TimHauck 2,905]

9 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

nope, not there in the constitution, you're making sh!t up

The Supreme Court disagrees with you, is that better?

[Meglamaniac 529]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

The Supreme Court disagrees with you, is that better?

but it doesn't, that's the funny part that you are clueless on.  Just answer my question above and maybe a light will come on

[squistion 2,216]

5 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

Hey last word guy, tell exactly what it means to be under the jurisdiction of the United States”

This should be fun

In the context of the U.S. Constitution, particularly the Fourteenth Amendment, being "under the jurisdiction of the United States" generally means being subject to its laws and political authority.    

[TimHauck 2,905]

1 minute ago, Meglamaniac said:

Hey last word guy, tell exactly what it means to be under the jurisdiction of the United States”

This should be fun

 

 

 

 

Anyone present in this country except for diplomats, are under the jurisdiction of the United States.  

[Meglamaniac 529]

3 minutes ago, squistion said:

In the context of the U.S. Constitution, particularly the Fourteenth Amendment, being "under the jurisdiction of the United States" generally means being subject to its laws and political authority.    

Nope, it means you have legal status in the USA. 

[Meglamaniac 529]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Anyone present in this country except for diplomats, are under the jurisdiction of the United States.  

nope, not illegals, they don not have legal status here 

[Strike 5,568]

16 minutes ago, squistion said:

Yes I was talking about Garcia, who was not accorded due process when he was first deported to El Salvador (which is why we have this thread). per Google:

a judge did rule in his favor regarding his wrongful deportation, preventing his immediate deportation and ordering his return to the US, it was a temporary measure to ensure due process.

So @TimHauck you gonna call out the pigeon focker now?  If not, you better never whine about any of us not calling someone out again.

[TimHauck 2,905]

18 minutes ago, squistion said:

Yes I was talking about Garcia, who was not accorded due process when he was first deported to El Salvador (which is why we have this thread). per Google:

a judge did rule in his favor regarding his wrongful deportation, preventing his immediate deportation and ordering his return to the US, it was a temporary measure to ensure due process.

What about before he was sent to El Salvador?  

If you’re just talking about him being sent to a terrorist prison in El Salvador, I agree.  Although I kinda feel like that’s not necessarily a matter of due process and moreso cruel and unusual punishment.

 

[squistion 2,216]

Just now, TimHauck said:

What about before he was sent to El Salvador?  

If you’re just talking about him being sent to a terrorist prison in El Salvador, I agree.  Although I kinda feel like that’s not necessarily a matter of due process and moreso cruel and unusual punishment.

Yes, that is what started this thread. The argument has not been that he couldn't be deported under any circumstances, it was that if he was deported, then due process must be accorded to him which was not the case here.

[Strike 5,568]

19 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

What about before he was sent to El Salvador?  

If you’re just talking about him being sent to a terrorist prison in El Salvador, I agree.  Although I kinda feel like that’s not necessarily a matter of due process and moreso cruel and unusual punishment.

 

Him being sent to El Salvador was not a due process issue.  It was a mistake.  The administration has acknowledged that.  But it wasn't due process.  You guys don't get to just use any term you want because it sounds good politically.  So you agree with the pigeon focker that a mistake is now due process?  Seriously?

[TimHauck 2,905]

9 minutes ago, Strike said:

Him being sent to El Salvador was not a due process issue.  It was a mistake.  The administration has acknowledged that.  But it wasn't due process.  You guys don't get to just use any term you want because it sounds good politically.  So you agree with the pigeon focker that a mistake is now due process?  Seriously?

Well first of all you need to acknowledge that it was more than just “a mistake.”  It started as a mistake, but became intentional when the admin made comments like “he’s never coming back” and refused to try to bring him back until the Supreme Court intervened.

Arguing whether him being sent to El Salvador was a due process issue feels like semantics as long as we can all agree that he shouldn’t have been sent there. And looks like @squistion agrees that he had due process prior to that.

[Strike 5,568]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Well first of all you need to acknowledge that it was more than just “a mistake.”  It started as a mistake, but became intentional when the admin made comments like “he’s never coming back” and refused to try to bring him back until the Supreme Court intervened.

Arguing whether him being sent to El Salvador was a due process issue feels like semantics as long as we can all agree that he shouldn’t have been sent there. And looks like @squistion agrees that he had due process prior to that.

No.  It's not semantics.  It wasn't a due process issue.  Period.  So you think it was.  Ugh.

[Meglamaniac 529]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

No.  It's not semantics.  It wasn't a due process issue.  Period.  So you think it was.  Ugh.

hmmmm

Didn't you tell me an hour ago to just ignore them??

[TimHauck 2,905]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

No.  It's not semantics.  It wasn't a due process issue.  Period.  So you think it was.  Ugh.

I literally just said I think it was more of a cruel and unusual punishment issue than a  due process issue. But I also think arguing about it is semantics, I can see the argument for why one would say it’s a due process issue.

[Horseman 2,472]

Why do people insist on wrestling with mental midgets?  

The POS isn't ever getting out of jail. Good riddance. The End.  

[Strike 5,568]

8 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

hmmmm

Didn't you tell me an hour ago to just ignore them??

Yes but I thought hack was going to be reasonable but now he's just flip flopping back and forth.  I should have known better than to ignore my own advice.  

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,126]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

Yes but I thought hack was going to be reasonable but now he's just flip flopping back and forth.  I should have known better than to ignore my own advice.  

I put KarenHauck on ignore about a week ago.  He's moved into the Rusty/Lady Squiztard/Ghey_Artest tier of losers.

[TimHauck 2,905]

Good to know a bunch of the righties just want this place to be a circle jerk.

[TimHauck 2,905]

9 minutes ago, Strike said:

Yes but I thought hack was going to be reasonable but now he's just flip flopping back and forth.  I should have known better than to ignore my own advice.  

Did you see me prove you wrong about the court order that you claimed meant he couldn’t be deported?

[Meglamaniac 529]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

Good to know a bunch of the righties just want this place to be a circle jerk.

LOL

Getting excited are you

[TimHauck 2,905]

Just now, Meglamaniac said:

LOL

Getting excited are you

No but @Horseman and @EternalShinyAndChrome are.  You weren’t here at the time but @Horseman’s go-to porn website is “gaywebcam.com”. NTTAWWT of course.

[Meglamaniac 529]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

No but @Horseman and @EternalShinyAndChrome are.  You weren’t here at the time but @Horseman’s go-to porn website is “gaywebcam.com”. NTTAWWT of course.

How would you know that

[BrahmaBulls 775]

17 minutes ago, Strike said:

Yes but I thought hack was going to be reasonable   

[Meglamaniac 529]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Anyone present in this country except for diplomats, are under the jurisdiction of the United States.  

Just out of curiosity, where did you get this load of crap from?

[TimHauck 2,905]

7 minutes ago, BrahmaBulls said:

So we’ve got almost a whole page of posts from like 4 different people talking to each other about how they “ignore” me.

I’m not sure you guys know the definition of “ignore”…

[TimHauck 2,905]

6 minutes ago, Meglamaniac said:

How would you know that

That was the link he posted to prove that porn was allowed on twitter.  I was wrong in thinking it wasn’t, but the thread was about the “Twitter files” when it came out that a lot of what was censored at the direction of the government was Hunter Biden d1ck pics, which @Horseman was trying to argue should have been allowed on Twitter but that is obviously incorrect.

[Meglamaniac 529]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

  I was wrong  

You dont say

[squistion 2,216]

34 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

I literally just said I think it was more of a cruel and unusual punishment issue than a  due process issue. But I also think arguing about it is semantics, I can see the argument for why one would say it’s a due process issue.

No, it is not an issue of semantics, due process was not given. If you want to say it was a mistake, OK, but then it was a mistake that denied him due process. A distinction without a difference.

[TimHauck 2,905]

1 hour ago, Meglamaniac said:

but it doesn't, that's the funny part that you are clueless on.  Just answer my question above and maybe a light will come on

2001 case of Zadvydas vs Davis

Despite the government’s broad power over immigration, the Supreme Court has recognized that aliens who have physically entered the United States generally come under the protective scope of the Due Process Clause, which applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.1

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt5-6-2-3/ALDE_00013726/#ALDF_00028415

 

But seriously @Meglamaniac, I appreciate you actually commenting about the topic of the thread.  Sorry to have to prove you wrong though.

[Meglamaniac 529]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

2001 case of Zadvydas vs Davis

Despite the government’s broad power over immigration, the Supreme Court has recognized that aliens who have physically entered the United States generally come under the protective scope of the Due Process Clause, which applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.1

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt5-6-2-3/ALDE_00013726/#ALDF_00028415

 

But seriously @Meglamaniac, I appreciate you actually commenting about the topic of the thread.  Sorry to have to prove you wrong though.

you didn't prove me wrong, Its not in the constitution despite what decisions the SCOTUS made

[TimHauck 2,905]

Just now, Meglamaniac said:

you didn't prove me wrong, Its not in the constitution despite what decisions the SCOTUS made

You said the Supreme Court didn’t disagree with you.  Survey says, they do.

[Strike 5,568]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

I literally just said Abrego Garcia had due process.   

Do you agree with these idiots saying illegals  don’t have a right to due process?

THIS is why I tried to give Hackboy a chance.  But, when challenged on this, he waffles and now it MIGHT be a due process issue or it MIGHT be cruel and unusual punishment.  I'm sure it also MIGHT be TREASON by TRUMP, or INSURRECTION!!!!!  Whatever liberals WANT it to be, and NEVER what it actually is.  Ugh.  

[Meglamaniac 529]

Just now, TimHauck said:

You said the Supreme Court didn’t disagree with you.  Survey says, they do.

Nope, nice try goober, I never said that, i said the constitution didn't disagree with me, would you like me to get pull the posts

[Meglamaniac 529]

1 hour ago, Meglamaniac said:

Nope, it means you have legal status in the USA. 

hmmm

not supreme court

[TimHauck 2,905]

1 minute ago, Meglamaniac said:

Nope, nice try goober, I never said that

Yes you did.

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

The Supreme Court disagrees with you, is that better?

 

1 hour ago, Meglamaniac said:

but it doesn't, that's the funny part that you are clueless on.  Just answer my question above and maybe a light will come on