Point of clarification, we can’t “deport” him to Gitmo. We could inprison him in Gitmo - but that would likely face even more legal challenges and due process queries.
1 Like
I don’t hear anyone trying to defend the Judge, only people defending people breaking into a federal building. There is nothing peaceful about anybody going into a building that has been broken into. Trying to say it is peaceful is just crazy.
4 Likes
Some here want to believe Abrego Garcia was not in MS-13 despite sufficient circumstantial evidence he is. Evidence that two separate judges used to conclude he was (when Trump was NOT president).
Here is the analogy I think some are hiding behind.
Yesterday morning I woke up and walked to the end of my driveway to pick up the paper. The driveway was wet, the road was wet, so was the grass and roof and cars for myself and all my neighbors. I said to my neighbor “looks like it rained last night”. He said: “you don’t know that”. I said: “but the circumstantial evidence makes it pretty certain”. He said “But you didn’t see it, so you don’t know. Maybe a silent plane flew over and dumped water everywhere”.
So, anyone that says Agrego Garcia was not in MS-13 is being my neighbor. Let’s do a quiz, instead of saying “we don’t know”, let’s honestly say what we believe by using percentages of certainty.
I am 99.9% sure he is in MS-13. How sure are you that he is or is not? Be honest.
1 Like
I must have missed the link to that order - could you point me to it again? All of the documents I’ve seen indicate that the judge in the 2019 case issued only an order withholding removal to El Salvador, but not that he issued a removal order to any other country.
6 Likes
I am 100% sure that you do not know if he is in MS-13 and that we should leave it up to the courts to decide that. Trying a case in public opinion never goes well. The Judges said return him, what is your problem with following the law?
6 Likes
I’d say I am 95% sure he is not in MS-13. Unlike your example, there is virtually no credible circumstantial evidence of his being in a gang. Wearing Chicago Bulls merch and the uncorroborated - and hearsay - testimony of an informant isn’t very strong initial evidence. Especially when other folks examining the allegation at the time found it less than credible.
Set against that the evidence that he isn’t in MS-13. The testimony of all his friends and family. The fact that he’s never lived in New York, despite that being the place where the section of the gang he was accused of being is located. The fact that the INS didn’t bother to appeal his withholding of approval or ask for a removal order to another country or even just put him in detention here, if he was a member of a dangerous gang. The fact that he’s never been convicted of or arrested for or even accused of any single instance of gang activity either before or since 2019. The fact that even though this is front page news and a massive issue for the Administration and all the resources of the DOJ and FBI have not uncovered any evidence or anecdotes or witnesses to any gang activity since 2019.
So no, it’s not like your analogy. It’s more like you go out to your lawn and you find the driveway and newspaper wet, but the newspaper leads with the headline “Drought Continues” and you can see your neighbor’s sprinkler still running and landing on your driveway. So when you say to your neighbor “looks like it rained last night” and he responds “No, it hasn’t rained in three weeks,” you might want to believe him.
8 Likes
ICE did not have a valid judicial warrant and that is the problem here. If you cannot understand that what Trump is trying to do is intimidate the judicial system then you are in a cult.
5 Likes
The problem is that, reportedly, he has not been convicted of a crime in the US. Deporting people to another country, where they will be at liberty, is one thing. Tossing people in prison, for an indeterminate time, regardless where the prison is, without being found guilty of a crime, is an entirely different matter.
Do I need to post the Rumpole piece again?
Steve
7 Likes
This explains it all.
But as criticism of the administration over its mishandling of the case spread, White House officials took over the response and began striking a far more strident tone in their public statements. They swiftly turned an admission of bureaucratic error into a political opportunity—a chance to flex executive authority and test the judicial branch’s ability to restrain presidential power. Abrego Garcia’s deportation became far more than just the case of one man; it developed into a measure of whether Donald Trump’s administration can send people—citizens or not—to foreign prisons without due process. All the while, Abrego Garcia has remained in detention in El Salvador, unable to communicate with his lawyers or his family.
5 Likes
I’m leaning high 90’s that he’s not, for all the reasons that @albaby1 clearly explained. I’d add in that Kilmar is a union sheet metal worker, with strong support from his brothers and sisters. That crowd typically doesn’t mix well with gang bangers.
But here’s the thing, what I think doesn’t matter. Before someone is locked away, our constitution affords them due process rights to argue their case. Immigrants, citizens…everyone! That also means your willingness to believe extremely weak circumstantial “evidence” doesn’t matter either. Just curious, what are the chances that you believe the 2020 election was stolen? I’d bet 100% you do.
Respectfully, it’s not like this either. It’s more like your neighbor sneaking up on your roof, waiting for you to leave your house the next morning. When morning comes and you leave, your neighbor proceeds to relieve himself on your head, yelling down…“Don’t look up, it’s raining!”
Now…some of us will think, “This doesn’t feel like rain”, and then run back into the house. As demonstrated by this thread - others will think, “This is the warmest rain I’ve ever felt”, and then continue to bask in newfound wonder.
1 Like
Due Process and the Abrego Garcia Case - FactCheck.org
The analysis also says this about due process…
But, Bush-Joseph said, the legal process can differ, depending on how a person entered the country. For example, someone who overstayed a visa and has been present in the U.S. for years generally would go to immigration court before they could be deported, while someone who has been in the U.S. illegally for less than two years could be subject to an expedited removal process. Under that process, an immigration officer can order a noncitizen to be removed, unless that person expresses a credible fear of returning to their home country and seeks asylum.
This is what I am trying to say, everyone gets a due process, but not all due processes are the same for all circumstances.
Yes, I do not “know”, I am only 99.9% sure. Unless you have a DNA test, you do not “know” if you children were fathered by you. But you know, don’t you.
Ok, so leaving it to the courts. Do believe it is false that two Maryland judges decided on the evidence that he was in MS-13? That was the courts and it happened while Trump was not president. Is this why nobody had more than 10% certainty that he was in MS-13. Are we presuming these judges are biased and making it up to get him out of the country?
I do not have a problem with following the law. I said before that he should not have been sent to El Salvador and that I am 90% sure the administration knew he should not be sent. I am for bringing him back and then deporting him somewhere else. I have said this, but it is apparently ignored.
You don’t know that! 
Do you remember that his claim was that if here were sent back to his home country, he would be killed by a Rival Gang? That is why the order was written that way.
I believe with 99.9% certainty that if he admits a rival gang is going to kill him, then he is telling the truth that he is in a gang. Yet, some of you say it is only a 10% chance that the gang he is in, is MS-13. I suppose you are astonished that I am so certain he is in MS-13, but I am twice as astonished that you seem to think all the circumstantial evidence says he is not. (Judges’ rulings, tattoos, associates, boss’ car). You seem to me like the neighbor that says there was only a 10% chance that rain last night made everything wet, just like rain does.
Did you know he was rounded up once with other members of MS-13. Did you know that when he was “trafficking” 8 immigrants in his car, that he was pulled over in Tennessee and the car was found to belong to his boss, who was in MS-13. This was a multiday trip, no one had luggage, all told the police officer that they lived at the same address. I give this a 0.01% chance they were just on a nice vacation trip from Louisiana to Maryland.
Here is something else I know with 90% certainty. MS-13 gang members have many common tattoos. The more you have in common, the more likely if it not a coincidence. If I were to get all the tattoos that he had and then placed among the members of a true MS-13 gang, I would be killed.
He had a job and was in a union. So did mobsters. Is that supposed to be hard evidence that he is not in MS-13?
You guys, it is ok that he might be in a gang! You can admit that without diminishing your argument. You are arguing about due process. I don’t care if he is in that gang or not, but common sense says he is.
1 Like
Ok, changing subject, you are 100% wrong, I never believed the election was stolen. When Hillary kept saying the 2016 election was illegitimate, I did not believe it. When Stacy Abrams kept saying the election for Georgia governor was stollen and she was the true governor, I did not believe it.
The way Trump “Challenged” the election was totally illegitimate and I totally disagreed with it.
See what happens when you are 100% sure 
It’s funny the assumptions people are willing to make about people they disagree with. Have I been spouting any unsupported conspiracy theories? Have I been posting unhinged and unsupported thoughts?
What do I assume about you? Just that you seem to have liberal views. I don’t assume you are single or married. I don’t assume you are an antifa Tesla-firebombing radical. I don’t assume you would go protest in front of the house of a supreme court justice. I don’t assume you think parents don’t have the right to know what teachers are telling their children. I don’t assume you wished the bullet had not missed, that would make you a horrible person. I assumed we could have a fair, opened minded discussion on the subject. I offered to let anyone present evidence that would change my mind. We have had some good exchanges and I believe in the fundamental of much of what is said. I believe in due process, I just think that has been due process when the restricted deportation order was issued. I have explained my thoughts on various forms of due process and provided backup.
But when you said you would be 100% that I believe the election was stolen, that was quite expository, both that you would think that of me without me having made any radical posts or accusations, but also that you would be willing to say that at all. Might as well call me Hitler or a Nazzi so you can feel good that you are superior and don’t need actually address facts or have an open minded discussion. I guess I will go back to just playing with stocks. I thank all those that interacted with integrity.
What we do know, is the Constitution leaves election rules up to the legislatures, state and federal. Trump cannot have an executive order that requires photo ID. A governor or state election official cannot change the rules without their legislature passing a law. If a governor says the polls will be open for two days, that is unconstitutional (don’t freak, I know that did not happen). But less obvious things happened in the name of COVID and they were not done by the legislature. I don’t think they made the difference, but it should not have been done without the legislatures quickly passing a law. Oddly, the most changes were in swing states, and that fed the fire of “illegitimacy”.
In the 2024 election, Trump hired hundreds or thousands of lawyers and stopped every attempt to change the voting rules.
1 Like
You STILL cannot deport someone TO A FOREIGN PRISON like this. Why is this so hard to understand? This is cruel. Trump is trying to figure out how far he can push the system. When will someone say no (SCOTUS, in fact, did), and will it even matter? Can Trump just ignore even SCOTUS? Because if he can, we’ve got a dictatorship people.
This is about more than just this one person. Witness the arrest of a judge who defied the Trump administration today. He is trying to figure out if he has ANY accountability at all. As a country, we better hope that he will eventually be held accountable. He has escaped this all his life. I really hope this streak ends now.
3 Likes
Not the same at all. Not even close.
Like I said the MS-13 is a red herring. What does it matter if he is MS-13? What matters is if he broke the law. If we are going to start putting people in prison because of their affiliation than every Proud Boy, Every 3K (Seems you can’t use that word but it is ok to use MS-13 and every other one, The Fool is a broken organization), Every Hells Angel, Every Oath Keeper will be in prison. But that isn’t the way it works. Show me where he has broken the law.
Well there you go Pete, we are in agreement. I don’t care whether you think he is MS-13, that is fine, Let’s just put him in front of a judge and get it done. Most of this can be solved by the courts, as long as we count on them to be the arbiter. Are they perfect, No, but at least they set the guidelines.
2 Likes
Yeah, because I read the FactCheck.org link you posted. It clearly states neither judge ruled on his membership in MS-13.
Did he admit to being in a rival gang? Nope. He said that he and his family were threatened and extorted by Barrio-18, the main rival gang of MS-13.
Oh, my bad. I thought we were just posting silly stuff without any actual evidence. Oops, found some.
To be fair, you’ve demonstrated a willingness to believe things that are simply not true, then when you’re confronted with evidence, you persist repeating false information. It’s not ridiculous to assume you’d believe other easily debunked lies. I guess I was basing my assumption on weak circumstantial evidence. My bad.
As many have already stated, gang banger or not, this dude is entitled to due process before he can be incarcerated and stripped of his liberty.
So you’re saying it’s ok they incarcerated him because of a restricted deportation order. Got it.
Kilmar hasn’t been charged with a crime, hasn’t been charged for being in a gang, having not been charged, hasn’t been convicted of anything! Yet, you think it’s ok to throw him in jail. Seems radical. Are you sure about 2020?
3 Likes
I think we might have come to a resolution. At least they are talking about it.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/judge-pauses-abrego-garcia-case-131635874.html