They're getting ready to toss 60,000 legal votes in NC to overturn a free and fair election that has withstood two recounts. There isn't going to be a midterm election that will stand if it flips the House.
Justice Dept. says it’s not required to bring back wrongly deported man
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
Liberals sure spend a lot of time defending criminal illegal alien gang bangers.
Maggots sure spend a lot of time trashing the Constitution of the United States and the rule of law in service to and worship of their orange god.
As one of the founders of the Let it Burn movement, I have to confess I am truly worried that it is over and nothing will save us.
It is not Trump or his Craven Cabinet or bootlicking GOP Senators and Congress folks giving away their power to the new king. It is our fellow countrymen and women by the millions too obtuse and brainwashed and in many cases racist to care to see what is happening.
What has happened in his first 80 days in normal times of our great nation would have resulted in massive change and push back by good men and women in our executive and legislative branch. They don’t exist anymore.
This man has brazenly supported Putin against Ukraine, almost broken up NATO, made Canadians hate us, crashed the stock market, crashed the federal government functioning, hired imbeciles to head our military, ignored the highest level of judicial branch and is now happily talking of deporting US Citizens they arbitrarily determine and much of our fellow citizens support it all and don’t care.
That is the reality. We have become just an awful country because so many of our citizens are simply awful people and have zero abilities of self thought and what is wrong. We are ****ed.
He is Hitler and we have tens of millions of Americans who would be more than happy to ship out black, brown, gay, Muslim, trans and Jews out of country with no due process to a third world death camp.
It is not Trump or his Craven Cabinet or bootlicking GOP Senators and Congress folks giving away their power to the new king. It is our fellow countrymen and women by the millions too obtuse and brainwashed and in many cases racist to care to see what is happening.
What has happened in his first 80 days in normal times of our great nation would have resulted in massive change and push back by good men and women in our executive and legislative branch. They don’t exist anymore.
This man has brazenly supported Putin against Ukraine, almost broken up NATO, made Canadians hate us, crashed the stock market, crashed the federal government functioning, hired imbeciles to head our military, ignored the highest level of judicial branch and is now happily talking of deporting US Citizens they arbitrarily determine and much of our fellow citizens support it all and don’t care.
That is the reality. We have become just an awful country because so many of our citizens are simply awful people and have zero abilities of self thought and what is wrong. We are ****ed.
He is Hitler and we have tens of millions of Americans who would be more than happy to ship out black, brown, gay, Muslim, trans and Jews out of country with no due process to a third world death camp.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 101,231
- 215,452
- 113
Emergency Triad: Are we now a country of political prisoners and gulags?
Jonathan V. Last
Apr 13, 2025
Nayib Bukele, the keeper of America’s gulag. (Ezequiel BECERRA / AFP)
1. Escape
If you were Chris Krebs, would you flee the country?Your answer before last week would probably be “no.” Your answer after last week is probably “maybe.” Your answer after the coming week might be “absolutely.”
Let’s break it down to understand what just happened and what is coming in the next 48 hours. Because the next two days may determine whether or not America crosses more critical red lines into open authoritarianism.
Last Wednesday, the president signed a memorandum instructing both the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security to investigate Chris Krebs. You’ll remember that during Trump’s first term, Krebs headed the new Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency—and was fired two weeks after the 2020 election for publicly rebutting Trump’s lies about the integrity of the election. Trump’s memorandum flips truth upside down, accusing Krebs of having “falsely and baselessly denied that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen,” and it not only orders an investigation into Krebs himself but it also commands that the entire cybersecurity company he now works for be stripped of any security clearances it has.
On Thursday, in an unsigned, unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ordered that the Trump administration must “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the immigrant whom Homeland Security mistakenly (by its own admission) arrested and extradited to a gulag in El Salvador.
On Saturday the government responded to the SCOTUS decision by stonewalling the district court judge and then claiming that it could not “facilitate” the return of Abrego Garcia because he is now detained by a sovereign nation on which the United States could not possibly exert any influence.
Also on Saturday, Nayib Bukele, the authoritarian ruler of that sovereign nation, arrived in the United States.
On Sunday, the government stonewalled the district court judge yet again—filing an update saying it had “no updates”—and in a separate filing challenged the Supreme Court’s order to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return, and added that the details of the deal with Bukele to imprison deportees from the United States are “classified.”
On Monday, Bukele will meet with his patron, Donald Trump.
Over the next 36 hours, one of three things will happen.
(1) Bukele will agree to repatriate Abrego Garcia to the United States. He will insist that this decision is entirely his own and that he has chosen to do so as a token of good will toward President Trump.
(2) Bukele will defer the decision, saying that he is considering returning Abrego Garcia but has not yet made up his mind.
(3) Bukele will refuse to return Abrego Garcia. He will say that this is an internal matter on which the American courts can have no say. He will claim that Abrego Garcia is a criminal, a danger, and a threat to El Salvador.1
If (1) comes to pass, then a constitutional crisis will have been postponed. Both Trump and SCOTUS can claim to have held firm, but no further action will be necessary until Trump creates the next showdown.
If (2) happens, then all of the pressure falls to the district judge, who will be in the position of trying to manage the U.S. government’s lawyers as they stall, obfuscate, and attempt to evade the fact that they are making a direct challenge to the authority of the judicial system.
But if it’s number 3?
Let us speak plainly: Nayib Bukele is a minor strongman who will do whatever Donald Trump demands of him.2 If Trump wants Abrego Garcia in the United States, then Bukele will return him. By the same token, if Bukele understands that Trump does not want Abrego Garcia returned, then he will keep the man.
Bukele has no interests in this game other than pleasing his political patron. His exercise of Salvadoran “sovereignty” can only be read as an expression of Donald Trump’s will.
Anyone who asserts otherwise is either a villain or a fool.
So if Bukele affirmatively refuses to repatriate Abrego Garcia, it will mean that Trump has told him not to.
At which point the Supreme Court will face a choice.
Surrender or escalation?
Seeing clearly and speaking plainly are what we do here. Stand with us.
Subscribed
2. Two Roads
Surrender would entail the Supreme Court declining to move further in Abrego Garcia’s case. The justices can let the district judge twist in the wind and government lawyers deal with the fallout.3In this scenario the Court does not take up the case again. It allows Kilmar Abrego Garcia to remain in El Salvador indefinitely.
I can see Chief Justice John Roberts viewing this as not a surrender but a tactical retreat. And I can understand the logic of it. If the Court declines to intervene further it could maintain that it did assert power over the executive and that the executive did not overtly defy it. The Court can say that it made its judgment and the executive acceded to the ruling—even though the president ultimately got the result he wanted.
Further, Roberts might tell himself that getting a unanimous decision and living to fight another day is the best outcome he was going to get. Because the truth is that no force in the American constitutional system can compel a dictator in El Salvador to do something that he understands the president does not want him to do.
Escalation would mean that when the plaintiffs attempt to take Abrego Garcia’s case back to SCOTUS, alleging that the administration has refused to comply with the Court’s order, the Court finds, in some way, that the administration did not attempt to comply—and from there makes a new demand of the executive in an attempt to gain compliance.
It is unclear where the logic of such actions would lead.
3. Asylum
Let’s speak plainly once more: Kilmar Abrego Garcia will not return to the United States unless Donald Trump wants him to. The Supreme Court has the (theoretical) power to force the president to take some actions. But it does not have the power to compel the president’s wishes. And Abrego Garcia’s fate is tied to Trump’s wishes, not any act that Trump might perform.So the question is: Is the Supreme Court willing to risk a final showdown on presidential power and authoritarianism in America at this moment?
I can see it both ways. On the one hand, the Court is vulnerable. There is no institution within the federal government to join it in a final stand against the executive. If it waits until 2027, then perhaps one house of Congress will be capable of standing with it in battle.
And if SCOTUS pushes all in on this case and loses, then it can no longer even pretend to have authority over the executive. After just three months of Trump’s rule, the Constitution will have become a dead letter.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 101,231
- 215,452
- 113
On the other hand, the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia is not a technical abstraction. It is not about some theory of government functioning. It is about the president’s use of secret police to abduct a man from American soil and send him to a foreign gulag.
For the Supreme Court to allow the government’s actions to stand after declaring them—unanimously—to be unconstitutional, is to declare open season on all enemies of the president. If Abrego Garcia can be kept in El Salvador in contravention of both the written law and the demands of the Supreme Court of the United States then there is nothing—literally nothing—stopping the administration from snatching whatever individual it chooses, putting him on a plane to El Salvador, and then claiming that what is done is done.
If we get (3) and the Supreme Court chooses not to escalate, it will mean that we have created a de facto extralegal policy of imprisonment in a foreign gulag for enemies of the regime.
And it is quite clear where that logic leads.
Which brings us back to our opening questions. If you are Chris Krebs and this week Bukele refuses to return Abrego Garcia and the Supreme Court decides to let Trump get away with it . . .
Would you stay in America? Or would you flee the country for your safety?
Let’s pretend, for a second, that you chose to leave. You show up at the Canadian border and file a claim of political asylum, alleging that you are fleeing political persecution in America and have reason to believe that remaining in your homeland would lead to indefinite imprisonment in a Salvadoran concentration camp.
What would the Canadian legal system make of such a claim?
Would they say that this was outlandish and unfounded?
Or would they believe it to be an accurate depiction of what America has become?
www.thebulwark.com
For the Supreme Court to allow the government’s actions to stand after declaring them—unanimously—to be unconstitutional, is to declare open season on all enemies of the president. If Abrego Garcia can be kept in El Salvador in contravention of both the written law and the demands of the Supreme Court of the United States then there is nothing—literally nothing—stopping the administration from snatching whatever individual it chooses, putting him on a plane to El Salvador, and then claiming that what is done is done.
If we get (3) and the Supreme Court chooses not to escalate, it will mean that we have created a de facto extralegal policy of imprisonment in a foreign gulag for enemies of the regime.
And it is quite clear where that logic leads.
Which brings us back to our opening questions. If you are Chris Krebs and this week Bukele refuses to return Abrego Garcia and the Supreme Court decides to let Trump get away with it . . .
Would you stay in America? Or would you flee the country for your safety?
Let’s pretend, for a second, that you chose to leave. You show up at the Canadian border and file a claim of political asylum, alleging that you are fleeing political persecution in America and have reason to believe that remaining in your homeland would lead to indefinite imprisonment in a Salvadoran concentration camp.
What would the Canadian legal system make of such a claim?
Would they say that this was outlandish and unfounded?
Or would they believe it to be an accurate depiction of what America has become?
Bukele, Abrego Garcia, and Red Lines
Emergency Triad: Are we now a country of political prisoners and gulags?
www.thebulwark.com
Just a reminder to some. This has been done in Cuba, Argentina, Ecuador,Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Venezuela and Brazil. Also Russia, Serbia, Iran, to name a few.
I can’t believe anyone who would be okay with this.
They’re called “the disappeared “.
Oh? Trump and millers comments today would argue with you on that.
Two immigration courts found this guy was MS-13 gangmember. He is an El Salvadoran citizen.
Bottom line. He’s back home where he belongs.
Bottom line. He’s back home where he belongs.
I guess I missed you heading to the ME to fight the Houthis and Iran.
The problem for D's is they are constantly crying wolf, even though they know they are lying. It's a daily or hourly occurrence.
Why should anyone believe this isn't more of the same?
No they didn’t. The government claimed that he was MS-13; the immigration courts merely deferred to the government’s determination, as they are required to do.
No immigration court ruled that he was MS-13.
Infuriating these anti-American “patriots” have us in this spot today.On the other hand, the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia is not a technical abstraction. It is not about some theory of government functioning. It is about the president’s use of secret police to abduct a man from American soil and send him to a foreign gulag.
For the Supreme Court to allow the government’s actions to stand after declaring them—unanimously—to be unconstitutional, is to declare open season on all enemies of the president. If Abrego Garcia can be kept in El Salvador in contravention of both the written law and the demands of the Supreme Court of the United States then there is nothing—literally nothing—stopping the administration from snatching whatever individual it chooses, putting him on a plane to El Salvador, and then claiming that what is done is done.
If we get (3) and the Supreme Court chooses not to escalate, it will mean that we have created a de facto extralegal policy of imprisonment in a foreign gulag for enemies of the regime.
And it is quite clear where that logic leads.
Which brings us back to our opening questions. If you are Chris Krebs and this week Bukele refuses to return Abrego Garcia and the Supreme Court decides to let Trump get away with it . . .
Would you stay in America? Or would you flee the country for your safety?
Let’s pretend, for a second, that you chose to leave. You show up at the Canadian border and file a claim of political asylum, alleging that you are fleeing political persecution in America and have reason to believe that remaining in your homeland would lead to indefinite imprisonment in a Salvadoran concentration camp.
What would the Canadian legal system make of such a claim?
Would they say that this was outlandish and unfounded?
Or would they believe it to be an accurate depiction of what America has become?
Bukele, Abrego Garcia, and Red Lines
Emergency Triad: Are we now a country of political prisoners and gulags?
It's being ignored. If they wanted to bring him back they could. They don't want to.
Trump wants to be scary. Deporting someone who was here legally and did nothing wrong is scary. Besides he's a financial liablity. if he's back in the States. He'd sue and win a large sum of money. He should receive money for what we did to him. It's unconstitutional and it's morally appalling. We've quickly become of nation without laws and morals under Trump.
First of all, I’m not a D. I never have been
Secondly, I know a lot more about Latin American than you do.
Your knowledge of Latin America is probably limited to tacos.
Are you even remotely aware of the numbers of political prisoners taken by other regimes?
The only difference is that this administration is shipping off people he doesn’t like to a foreign prison that the US pays for. And the current administration wants to build five more.
And they claimed they can’t bring anyone back because it’s a foreign country.
I don’t know why all of this is so hard for people to understand.
"That's not up to us," Bondi said. "The Supreme Court ruled, President, that if El Salvador wants to return him ... we would facilitate it, meaning provide a plane."
But the Supreme Court offered no qualifier of whether El Salvador wants to return Abrego Garcia. The court ruled that a lower court order properly required the government to "facilitate" his release from El Salvador's custody. The Supreme Court on Thursday said the Trump administration must facilitate the release of the Maryland man from custody in El Salvador, but ordered additional proceedings before a federal district court.
El Salvador's President Bukele says he won't return Kilmar Abrego Garcia to U.S.
El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele said "of course I'm not going to do it" about returning Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Maryland man deported to an El Salvadoran prison.
www.cbsnews.com
- Sep 13, 2002
- 101,231
- 215,452
- 113
Shut up dummy, the adults are trying to have a conversation.
So Trump made the effort to try to get him back, Trump sounded like he didn't want him back, his white house is saying they are not trying because they are not under their control, even though they are paying el salvador money every month to house these individuals. Why are we paying them money then. They aren't are concern.
Link to the U.S. paying to have El Salvadoran citizens incarcerated in El Salvador?
Once they arrive in their home country, why would the U.S. be involved?
So they aren't paying them $6 million to house them in spread out payments, with anticipated future deals, currently looking at jailing US citizens.
Are you just trying to be an asshole?
Are you trying to claim that he's is being held in prison because of El Salvador authority rather than being sent there by the US? Are you saying the US extradited Garcia to El Salvador to face charges there? Do you have a link for your claim?
He absolutely 100% is being held under El Salvador's authority. The U.S. deported him to his home country.
I have no idea why you bring up extradition. It's not applicable here.
Did you ironically just describe the open border policy the Biden Administration?
Millions of illegals
Fentanyl trafficking
Human trafficking
NGO money laundering
300,000 missing kids
4 years of lies and gaslighting
Damn this is unintentionally hilarious.
"Want" isn't the applicable term. He was deported. El Salvador took their own citizen back, as is customary.
But it was an administrative error by the Trump team. Seems like Trump needs to start negotiating a deal to get him back.
It was an error.
But "facilitate" does not mean negotiate. The courts have no authority to force the executive branch to negotiate.
Facilitate is to help something happen. Trump can do that by using his "Art of the Deal" skills.
So we can kill any citizen in error? We can deport any US citizen in error? We can ignore any supreme court ruling? If Trump wanted him back he would be back. Trump doesn't want him back, so they both play tough guy in front of the camera. Lets get serious about whats going on here. Trump is an asshole to immigrants, legal, illegal, or those claiming asylum or otherwise. You are the same. The fact that you want to continue to defend this is beyond ridiculous. Do you feel better about yourself? Are you a paid poster? What is your prerogative in all this? You get your jollies over trying to defend the ridiculous positions of the administration?
Then someone, somewhere in the DoJ needs to be fired and charges need to be filled against him/her…..Malfeasance….Incompetence….criminal activity….there can be NO excuse for a mistake like this.
"How can I return him to the United States? Like if I smuggle him into the United States?" Bukele said, sitting beside Trump in the Oval Office, when asked if he’d return Kilmar Abrego Garcia. "Of course I'm not going to do it. The question is preposterous."
Asked if he’d be released in his own country, he said, “We’re not very fond of releasing terrorists.”
Trump then turned to Bukele and said of the assembled reporters: "They'd love to have a criminal released into our country. These are sick people."
Those are quotes. Garcia isn't being returned and Trump isn't going to do anything to get him returned despite a SC ruling demanding just that. The only question you need to answer is if you agree that the president of the United States can have a person grabbed and taken to a foreign prison on a whim because that's exactly what happened. Does the president have that unfettered power? Yes or no.
Does the president have the right to grab a person off the street and send them to an overseas prison without due process? Yes or no. Don't dodge the question...just understand that a yes or a failure to answer marks you as a fascist. What have you got?
