See, you "found it" but don't cite it.Not to worry, I found it, and sadly as predicted he never mentioned speech, he never mentioned speaking out about due process at all.
You guys have to cool it with the Huffpost obsession.
See, you "found it" but don't cite it.Not to worry, I found it, and sadly as predicted he never mentioned speech, he never mentioned speaking out about due process at all.
You guys have to cool it with the Huffpost obsession.
I don't like it, because like this article it is embarrassingly inaccurate.Coming from someone who almost never quotes a source, huffpost is just as reliable as any other.
The fact you don't like it is irrelevant.
2 judges presided over it, on 2 separate occasions and used the confidential information and, a year apart agreed that there was plenty of evidence...And not one shred of this brought to court or proven.
www.bbc.com
You sanctimonious twat the link to the interview was right there in the huffpost article.Got a link to the interview? I can't take Huffpost or daily beast links seriously, it's so tough to ready such snippeted quotes lol
Which is where I got it, knock off the insults though, its not a good look.You sanctimonious twat the link to the interview was right there in the huffpost article.
Is it, all it says is the evidence was he was![]()
Kilmar Abrego Garcia and MS-13: What is alleged and what we know - BBC News
BBC Verify looks at the evidence behind allegations that the Salvadoran mistakenly deported to a mega-prison was a dangerous gang member.www.bbc.com
This is a decent summation
I don't like it, because like this article it is embarrassingly inaccurate.
Have you watched the video?
Quote me in the video where he threatens Americans who are against deportations, go on ill wait
Remember, he only wants to disagreeYou sanctimonious twat the link to the interview was right there in the huffpost article.
Is it, all it says is the evidence was he was
A) loitering whilst wearing sports clothing sometimes associated with gangs. Also with some tattoos. We now know that a tattoo used to train us enforcement was in fact a tattoo from a man in Derby who used a tattoo to commemorate his daughters birth.
B) a complaint from his wife subsequently withdrawn.
C) was caught speeding.
Also some unknown hidden statement purportedly from a court.
He was protected from deportation by a court order from that same court which the US then ignored by bypassing the courts.
Bear in mind all these claims are coming solely from the strumpet white house which we know never lies!!!
No I don'tRemember, he only wants to disagree
www.bbc.co.uk
"Trump Adviser Has Bone-Chilling Threat For Americans Who Oppose Deportations"I guess the word "implied" in the article is too hard for you.
For your education here is the dictionary definition.
![]()
implied
if something is implied, it is understood to be true or to exist, although it…dictionary.cambridge.org
Actually the article is very accurate to the video, you just chose to reinterpret it to be argumentative.
Please don't ever go into politics. I'd hate to see the justice system under you.2 judges presided over it, on 2 separate occasions and used the confidential information and, a year apart agreed that there was plenty of evidence...
As I've stated, I'm not making a statement of who is right or wrong, i font know yet without further reading.Please don't ever go into politics. I'd hate to see the justice system under you.
"Yeah, we have a bit of evidence."
"Great, lock him up, that's enough."
I know you said it's muddy, but the whole point of an impartial, judicial system is to protect innocent people. You don't convict on a probably and even attempting to imply that the US Government was correct is ridiculous. The issue has nothing to do with the man in question, the issue is that the US Government is ignoring the law and operating without accountability. Shifting the conversation onto whether the guy 'might' have been guilty is pathetic.
His position as a gang member is largely irrelevant to the issue of the legality of his deportation. Yes there may have been evidence for the criminal things you listed, however he hadn't been convicted of gang activity. In a system that values the rule of law, that's an important distinction.As I've stated, I'm not making a statement of who is right or wrong, i font know yet without further reading.
I merely claimed the waters are muddy around the case, I hadn't commented on it because I had skimmed a few articles about a 'Maryland father'. It's notnproving as simple as poor father accidentally deported and refused return home...
The true story is potential MS13 gang member, who admitted to illegally entering the USA, who contributed decently over 20 years, had a small number of brushes with law enforcement regarding gang activity, human trafficking, and domestic abuse, was deported supposedly illegally to El Salvador, and was imprisoned. He is believed innocent by Democrats, guilty by Republicans, and there is enough confidential evidence to convince 2 separate judges of his MS13 links...
Is that a fair summation? It's pretty along the lines of the BBC article no?
The legalities around his deportation I'm just getting into, but it's difficult with so many sources politically biased for and against.
Sorry, my fault. I've stayed out of this thread because it's gotten so extreme. I'm not going to keep discussing things with when you completely ignore what I say.As I've stated, I'm not making a statement of who is right or wrong, i font know yet without further reading.
I merely claimed the waters are muddy around the case, I hadn't commented on it because I had skimmed a few articles about a 'Maryland father'. It's notnproving as simple as poor father accidentally deported and refused return home...
The true story is potential MS13 gang member, who admitted to illegally entering the USA, who contributed decently over 20 years, had a small number of brushes with law enforcement regarding gang activity, human trafficking, and domestic abuse, was deported supposedly illegally to El Salvador, and was imprisoned. He is believed innocent by Democrats, guilty by Republicans, and there is enough confidential evidence to convince 2 separate judges of his MS13 links...
Is that a fair summation? It's pretty along the lines of the BBC article no?
The legalities around his deportation I'm just getting into, but it's difficult with so many sources politically biased for and against.
I can agree with 90% of this, however from what I'm reading now he's in an El Salvador prison the US government's hands are tied.His position as a gang member is largely irrelevant to the issue of the legality of his deportation. Yes there may have been evidence for the criminal things you listed, however he hadn't been convicted of gang activity. In a system that values the rule of law, that's an important distinction.
As it stood by law, courtd had said he could not be deported back to El Salvador. This was ignored by the Trump administration. They then ordered his plane be turned back, this was also ignored by the Trump administration. The supreme court itself then ordered they take every measure to repatriate him, this has also been ignored. If you were going to attempt to test the waters of how far you could get ignoring court orders on deporting people you shouldn't, can you think of a better case to use?
The Trump administration has now shown full willingness to ignore what the courts say and it lays the groundwork for deporting other people they have no right to deport. It also lays the groundwork for ignoring the supreme court on other issues.
That's a far bigger issue than if he was or wasn't a gang member. If he was then go through the correct legal process and prove it.