Van Hollen in El Salvador

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Defending due process which apparently wasn't followed considering our Federal Government admitted to mistakenly deporting him. You can't let due process slide just because this particular guy may not be a great person because it's a slippery slope.

DP. Here's one reason why many conservatives find the Democrat cries for "Due Process" to be hollow. Feel free to disagree, but a common perception is that Democrats and Democrat-appointed federal/state judges weaponized the courts and DOJ using novel legal theories and the full power of the law enforcement apparatus to target them.

Now, you might assert that those individuals received their Due Process, so what's the issue? The issue is that such Due Process was biased, so for all intents and purposes, wasn't Due Process at all.

"The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process." - Eric Holder

"Left-wing zealots have often been prepared to ride roughshod over due process and basic considerations of fairness when they think they can get away with it. For them the ends always seems to justify the means. That is precisely how their predecessors came to create the gulag." - Margaret Thatcher

Spare us. You have a literal plank in your eye, did you know?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Which US law implements a punishment of life imprisonment in cruel and unusual conditions for domestic violence?

He may not be a wonderful person but the real argument here is not whether he's a good person or not, it's whether the US should be able to send people to countries that will violate their human rights.

So either you're too stupid to understand the bigger picture or you're in support of violating every ideal that makes America what it is. Which is it? Idiot or fascist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Defending due process which apparently wasn't followed considering our Federal Government admitted to mistakenly deporting him. You can't let due process slide just because this particular guy may not be a great person because it's a slippery slope.

DP. Here's one reason why many conservatives find the Democrat cries for "Due Process" to be hollow. Feel free to disagree, but a common perception is that Democrats and Democrat-appointed federal/state judges weaponized the courts and DOJ using novel legal theories and the full power of the law enforcement apparatus to target them.

Now, you might assert that those individuals received their Due Process, so what's the issue? The issue is that such Due Process was biased, so for all intents and purposes, wasn't Due Process at all.

"The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process." - Eric Holder

"Left-wing zealots have often been prepared to ride roughshod over due process and basic considerations of fairness when they think they can get away with it. For them the ends always seems to justify the means. That is precisely how their predecessors came to create the gulag." - Margaret Thatcher

The Court of Appeals are left wing zealots?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Which US law implements a punishment of life imprisonment in cruel and unusual conditions for domestic violence?

He may not be a wonderful person but the real argument here is not whether he's a good person or not, it's whether the US should be able to send people to countries that will violate their human rights.

So either you're too stupid to understand the bigger picture or you're in support of violating every ideal that makes America what it is. Which is it? Idiot or fascist?

Which is wny an ultra conservative Federalist Society justice on appeals court wrote such an incredibly scathing decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Defending due process which apparently wasn't followed considering our Federal Government admitted to mistakenly deporting him. You can't let due process slide just because this particular guy may not be a great person because it's a slippery slope.

DP. Here's one reason why many conservatives find the Democrat cries for "Due Process" to be hollow. Feel free to disagree, but a common perception is that Democrats and Democrat-appointed federal/state judges weaponized the courts and DOJ using novel legal theories and the full power of the law enforcement apparatus to target them.

Now, you might assert that those individuals received their Due Process, so what's the issue? The issue is that such Due Process was biased, so for all intents and purposes, wasn't Due Process at all.

"The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process." - Eric Holder

"Left-wing zealots have often been prepared to ride roughshod over due process and basic considerations of fairness when they think they can get away with it. For them the ends always seems to justify the means. That is precisely how their predecessors came to create the gulag." - Margaret Thatcher

The Court of Appeals are left wing zealots?

PP is changing the subject in order to distract from the current situation in which POTUS and his goons are blatantly defying court orders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Defending due process which apparently wasn't followed considering our Federal Government admitted to mistakenly deporting him. You can't let due process slide just because this particular guy may not be a great person because it's a slippery slope.

DP. Here's one reason why many conservatives find the Democrat cries for "Due Process" to be hollow. Feel free to disagree, but a common perception is that Democrats and Democrat-appointed federal/state judges weaponized the courts and DOJ using novel legal theories and the full power of the law enforcement apparatus to target them.

Now, you might assert that those individuals received their Due Process, so what's the issue? The issue is that such Due Process was biased, so for all intents and purposes, wasn't Due Process at all.

"The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process." - Eric Holder

"Left-wing zealots have often been prepared to ride roughshod over due process and basic considerations of fairness when they think they can get away with it. For them the ends always seems to justify the means. That is precisely how their predecessors came to create the gulag." - Margaret Thatcher

The Court of Appeals are left wing zealots?

The 4th Circuit, no less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Which US law implements a punishment of life imprisonment in cruel and unusual conditions for domestic violence?

He may not be a wonderful person but the real argument here is not whether he's a good person or not, it's whether the US should be able to send people to countries that will violate their human rights.

So either you're too stupid to understand the bigger picture or you're in support of violating every ideal that makes America what it is. Which is it? Idiot or fascist?

He was sent to his home country and they are keeping him in jail because they think he’s a gang member.

Your argument is we have the authority and/or obligation to keep a citizen of another country in the USA even though they have not been convicted of a crime? So at this point we should keep ALL El Salvador citizens that are currently in the USA from leaving right?

You’re either too stupid to understand the USA has zero say in what ANY country does with their own people, or think international law does not matter. Which is it? Stupid or uneducated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Defending due process which apparently wasn't followed considering our Federal Government admitted to mistakenly deporting him. You can't let due process slide just because this particular guy may not be a great person because it's a slippery slope.

DP. Here's one reason why many conservatives find the Democrat cries for "Due Process" to be hollow. Feel free to disagree, but a common perception is that Democrats and Democrat-appointed federal/state judges weaponized the courts and DOJ using novel legal theories and the full power of the law enforcement apparatus to target them.

Now, you might assert that those individuals received their Due Process, so what's the issue? The issue is that such Due Process was biased, so for all intents and purposes, wasn't Due Process at all.

"The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process." - Eric Holder

"Left-wing zealots have often been prepared to ride roughshod over due process and basic considerations of fairness when they think they can get away with it. For them the ends always seems to justify the means. That is precisely how their predecessors came to create the gulag." - Margaret Thatcher

The Court of Appeals are left wing zealots?

Did I say that? Was the 4th Circuit targeting conservatives in the Garcia case? Let me bold the point I was making, which it's pretty clear you noticed but disregard in order to seem clever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Defending due process which apparently wasn't followed considering our Federal Government admitted to mistakenly deporting him. You can't let due process slide just because this particular guy may not be a great person because it's a slippery slope.

DP. Here's one reason why many conservatives find the Democrat cries for "Due Process" to be hollow. Feel free to disagree, but a common perception is that Democrats and Democrat-appointed federal/state judges weaponized the courts and DOJ using novel legal theories and the full power of the law enforcement apparatus to target them.

Now, you might assert that those individuals received their Due Process, so what's the issue? The issue is that such Due Process was biased, so for all intents and purposes, wasn't Due Process at all.

"The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process." - Eric Holder

"Left-wing zealots have often been prepared to ride roughshod over due process and basic considerations of fairness when they think they can get away with it. For them the ends always seems to justify the means. That is precisely how their predecessors came to create the gulag." - Margaret Thatcher

The Court of Appeals are left wing zealots?

Did I say that? Was the 4th Circuit targeting conservatives in the Garcia case? Let me bold the point I was making, which it's pretty clear you noticed but disregard in order to seem clever.

The 4th wing ruling indicated thr ex

[Anonymous]

*the executive is knowingly playing a fake game of semantics rather than following the law

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Which US law implements a punishment of life imprisonment in cruel and unusual conditions for domestic violence?

He may not be a wonderful person but the real argument here is not whether he's a good person or not, it's whether the US should be able to send people to countries that will violate their human rights.

So either you're too stupid to understand the bigger picture or you're in support of violating every ideal that makes America what it is. Which is it? Idiot or fascist?

Being repatriated back to his native country is not cruel and unusual punishment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe he can ask Garcia why his wife filed a claim of domestic abuse against him.

Shame he didn’t fly to Iran when a US citizen from Maryland was held hostage there. That man spoke out today to ask why his case wasn’t given this attention.

Of all the things happening in the world right now, he's got time to fly to El Salvador to "free" a suspected Salvadoran gang member who was in the US illegally.

The Congress is on recess. He is using his time to try to get one of his constituents freed. Did you complain about the myriad GOP congresspeople who have been there this week and DiD gain access?

Whether Congress is in session or not, this is not the best use of time and resources when potentially thousands of Maryland residents are losing their jobs. Only Democrats throw up their hands and scream "we can't do anything" when they are getting bulldozed by Republican policies.

+1. i'm a Fed and MD resident. i reached out to his office. very early in the Trump Administration when we were being hassled by endless emails from DOGE. never heard a word back from his office. and yet here he went down to Central America? but he couldn't be bothered to assign a response email to an intern for another constituent. color me unimpressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Which US law implements a punishment of life imprisonment in cruel and unusual conditions for domestic violence?

He may not be a wonderful person but the real argument here is not whether he's a good person or not, it's whether the US should be able to send people to countries that will violate their human rights.

So either you're too stupid to understand the bigger picture or you're in support of violating every ideal that makes America what it is. Which is it? Idiot or fascist?

He was sent to his home country and they are keeping him in jail because they think he’s a gang member.

Your argument is we have the authority and/or obligation to keep a citizen of another country in the USA even though they have not been convicted of a crime? So at this point we should keep ALL El Salvador citizens that are currently in the USA from leaving right?

You’re either too stupid to understand the USA has zero say in what ANY country does with their own people, or think international law does not matter. Which is it? Stupid or uneducated?

YES! Are you kidding?! Did you think this was some sort of "gotcha?!" Everyone on American soil is entitled to American justice which means we don't send people from American soil to places where they will be subject to conditions America has deemed unacceptable for humans.

Even if we accept your premise as true that America has zero say in what any country does with their own people (which isn't even true to begin with considering America's LONG history of interfering with other countries) it's completely irrelevant because THE PEOPLE ARE IN AMERICA FIRST YOU ABSOLUTE DUNCE! We may have zero say in what they do but when they're in America we can JUST NOT SEND THEM TO THE PLACE WHERE THEIR RIGHTS WILL BE VIOLATED AND WE HAVE ZERO SAY IN IT!

This is so incredibly obvious to anyone with a brain that it leads to the conclusion that you're either too stupid to live or you actually understand this fact and don't care because you view brown people as not deserving of human rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Which US law implements a punishment of life imprisonment in cruel and unusual conditions for domestic violence?

He may not be a wonderful person but the real argument here is not whether he's a good person or not, it's whether the US should be able to send people to countries that will violate their human rights.

So either you're too stupid to understand the bigger picture or you're in support of violating every ideal that makes America what it is. Which is it? Idiot or fascist?

Being repatriated back to his native country is not cruel and unusual punishment.

"Look, all we're doing is sending Jews back to their native Germany. Whatever happens to them after that is of no concern to us and certainly isn't wrong. I mean, all we're doing is moving them from one place to another!"

-This POS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm through with trying to reason with someone who has ZERO interest in anything but protecting this MS13 gang member.

He appears to have been a wife beater but there is zero proof of him being "MS-13". Grow up!

That’s a great argument. He beats his Wife, but he’s a good guy. Keep defending him, now we know you’re ok with wife beaters.

Which US law implements a punishment of life imprisonment in cruel and unusual conditions for domestic violence?

He may not be a wonderful person but the real argument here is not whether he's a good person or not, it's whether the US should be able to send people to countries that will violate their human rights.

So either you're too stupid to understand the bigger picture or you're in support of violating every ideal that makes America what it is. Which is it? Idiot or fascist?

He was sent to his home country and they are keeping him in jail because they think he’s a gang member.

Your argument is we have the authority and/or obligation to keep a citizen of another country in the USA even though they have not been convicted of a crime? So at this point we should keep ALL El Salvador citizens that are currently in the USA from leaving right?

You’re either too stupid to understand the USA has zero say in what ANY country does with their own people, or think international law does not matter. Which is it? Stupid or uneducated?

YES! Are you kidding?! Did you think this was some sort of "gotcha?!" Everyone on American soil is entitled to American justice which means we don't send people from American soil to places where they will be subject to conditions America has deemed unacceptable for humans.

Even if we accept your premise as true that America has zero say in what any country does with their own people (which isn't even true to begin with considering America's LONG history of interfering with other countries) it's completely irrelevant because THE PEOPLE ARE IN AMERICA FIRST YOU ABSOLUTE DUNCE! We may have zero say in what they do but when they're in America we can JUST NOT SEND THEM TO THE PLACE WHERE THEIR RIGHTS WILL BE VIOLATED AND WE HAVE ZERO SAY IN IT!

This is so incredibly obvious to anyone with a brain that it leads to the conclusion that you're either too stupid to live or you actually understand this fact and don't care because you view brown people as not deserving of human rights.

1. He’s currently not in the USA so we have no authority.
2. I’m brown you moron.