Van Hollen in El Salvador

[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.

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.

He was in the USA before we sent him to a torture camp. While he was here we had every opportunity to not send him to a torture camp. We are discussing theory and policy, and in such a discussion things may be discussed that are not dangling in front of you like a string in front of a cat, or are you so stupid that you don't understand object permanence?

Oh who am I kidding, you're a fascist, of course you are so stupid you don't understand object permanence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

He was in the USA before we sent him to a torture camp. While he was here we had every opportunity to not send him to a torture camp. We are discussing theory and policy, and in such a discussion things may be discussed that are not dangling in front of you like a string in front of a cat, or are you so stupid that you don't understand object permanence?

Oh who am I kidding, you're a fascist, of course you are so stupid you don't understand object permanence.

DP. Wow, calling a brown guy stupid. Are all brown people stupid to you, Mr racist?

[Anonymous]

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

Sounds like what Biden did for 4 years, as did Obama and Clinton for 8 years. Were you complaining then, or only now?

A true test of your belief is whether you hold it when your party is in power.

I think this guy should have his day in immigration court, and then deported (or kept in El Salvador of the hold is lifted). His behavior in the US would not seem to be what Americans want in lawful immigrants (or even asylum seekers).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

He was in the USA before we sent him to a torture camp. While he was here we had every opportunity to not send him to a torture camp. We are discussing theory and policy, and in such a discussion things may be discussed that are not dangling in front of you like a string in front of a cat, or are you so stupid that you don't understand object permanence?

Oh who am I kidding, you're a fascist, of course you are so stupid you don't understand object permanence.

DP. Wow, calling a brown guy stupid. Are all brown people stupid to you, Mr racist?

+1 Not a good look for the PP.

[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.

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.

Well, if you really are brown (which I highly doubt) then you are a traitor for siding with the MAGAs!

[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

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

Way to dodge the issue. I explained why some conservatives think the way they do and you toss around a bible reference without support.

If you expect conservatives to see things from your perspective, you must see things from theirs. If you refuse, to do this you're nothing more than a blind zealot and exactly what you accuse conservatives of being.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Well, if you really are brown (which I highly doubt) then you are a traitor for siding with the MAGAs!

DP. Ah, now we move on to the race traitor accusation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

He was in the USA before we sent him to a torture camp. While he was here we had every opportunity to not send him to a torture camp. We are discussing theory and policy, and in such a discussion things may be discussed that are not dangling in front of you like a string in front of a cat, or are you so stupid that you don't understand object permanence?

Oh who am I kidding, you're a fascist, of course you are so stupid you don't understand object permanence.

DP. Wow, calling a brown guy stupid. Are all brown people stupid to you, Mr racist?

No, all brown people aren't stupid, but all MAGA CHUDs pretending to be brown people are and because we're not stupid we can spot you a mile away. I'd point out how we know but that would help you do better next time so begone troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Well, if you really are brown (which I highly doubt) then you are a traitor for siding with the MAGAs!

Oops, your racism is showing. Your view that brown people are unable to entertain the full spectrum of political philosophies available to whites was the tell. I guess you are saying blacks should stay on the plantation and be good little natural born democrats? That’s mighty progressive of you. Tell us more about what they are not supposed to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

He was in the USA before we sent him to a torture camp. While he was here we had every opportunity to not send him to a torture camp. We are discussing theory and policy, and in such a discussion things may be discussed that are not dangling in front of you like a string in front of a cat, or are you so stupid that you don't understand object permanence?

Oh who am I kidding, you're a fascist, of course you are so stupid you don't understand object permanence.

DP. Wow, calling a brown guy stupid. Are all brown people stupid to you, Mr racist?

Nobody is buying that BS so don’t waste your time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
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.
.

According to the court record in the alien enemies act case, this is false. The human rights record at this prison has been declared acceptable.

[Anonymous]

Illegal immigrants are not entitled to lengthy court processes nor to the due process US citizens get. You snuck it illegally, you can be forcibly removed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.
.

According to the court record in the alien enemies act case, this is false. The human rights record at this prison has been declared acceptable.

DP. Who has declared the “human rights record of this prison acceptable”? The Trump administration? Because international human rights organizations have documented the following:

—cells have 65–70 prisoners each
—inmates are confined 23.5 hours daily, with no outdoor access, family visits, or rehabilitation programs. ​
—cells lack basic amenities like mattresses and pillows; prisoners sleep on tiered metal bunks under constant lights.
—human rights reports highlight abuses, including torture, lack of medical care, and over 260 inmate deaths since 2022. ​

This is the prison that Trump wants to send “home growns” to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Sounds like what Biden did for 4 years, as did Obama and Clinton for 8 years. Were you complaining then, or only now?

A true test of your belief is whether you hold it when your party is in power.

I think this guy should have his day in immigration court, and then deported (or kept in El Salvador of the hold is lifted). His behavior in the US would not seem to be what Americans want in lawful immigrants (or even asylum seekers).

Knowingly player semantics to disappear whoever they want from US soil to a prison in a foreign country? Do tell.

In the words of ultra conservative, Federalist Society, 4th Circuit Judge Wilkerson

"It is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter. But in this case, it is not hard at all. The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear. "

I think I may repeatedly post this quite to every single reply moving forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

Sounds like what Biden did for 4 years, as did Obama and Clinton for 8 years. Were you complaining then, or only now?

A true test of your belief is whether you hold it when your party is in power.

I think this guy should have his day in immigration court, and then deported (or kept in El Salvador of the hold is lifted). His behavior in the US would not seem to be what Americans want in lawful immigrants (or even asylum seekers).

Knowingly player semantics to disappear whoever they want from US soil to a prison in a foreign country? Do tell.

In the words of ultra conservative, Federalist Society, 4th Circuit Judge Wilkerson

"It is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter. But in this case, it is not hard at all. The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear. "

I think I may repeatedly post this quite to every single reply moving forward.

DP. I agree they should have had his paperwork in order. I just find Kilmar extremely unsympathetic and cannot reach the level of outrage that is being requested here. It was an error that can easily be corrected- he can just be reprocessed.

The second problem is one of clarity. The US didn't "stash Kilmar in a foreign prison." He was returned to his native El Salvador, where he was imprisoned *by the government of El Salvador* pursuant to *their laws.* While Trump is indeed asserting the right to have US prisoners kept in foreign prisons, that isn't what is actually happening in Kilmar's case. He is being kept by his own government. This is further illustrated by the fact that SCOTUS asked Trump to "facilitate the return" of Kilmar. It's an acknowledgement that we are not the only party with control here, in fact, El Salvador is denying the request. If we had control, they would just send him back.