Quote:

---

The only evidence anyone has ever provided that Garcia is MS-13 came from one cop who claimed he got the info from an anonymous informant

Turns out that cop is a criminal.

---

You might want to let both courts that ruled otherwise know you are privy to more information than they are.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

CampSkunk said:

---

He could have, but Trump's DOJ failed to secure a removal order back in 2019, which was a mistake they have admitted. So, it's not a double due process because the Trump DOJ never followed through the first time.

---

OK. So you are advocating that an illegal gang member from El Salvador who never had a right to be in America and who is now in his home country should now be brought back here to do what?

Really odd position.

---

It would be odd if that's what I stated. But that's not what I stated. I'm advocating that the Trump DOJ fix the mistake they have already admitted, go through the process of following the law, and have a proper order of removal issued. It doesn't matter that I disagree with the law, or that the guy is a scumbag, or that the judge is liberal. That's the rules and they must be followed.

I wish CampSkunk would want to protect:

• the girls playing against trans athletes in sports as much as they protect MS13 members
• the rights to peaceful pray outside of clinic as they protect MS members
• people being told to take a jab or lose your job as they protect MS 13 members
• Tesla's from being defaced as they protect MS 13 members
• the right to fly the American flag as they protect MS 13 members
• people from the FBI using made up dossiers to launch FISA investigations as they protect MS 13 members
• a secure election without non-citizens voting as they protect MS 13 members

Would probably be something we could agree on at that time.

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

carl spacklers hat said:

---

As a member of a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (MS-13), he also is not eligible for due process. Plus he has a Deportation Order. Not sure what the problem is here. Some judge back in 2019/2020 screwed up by putting a stay order on the Deportation Order. That was the mistake, not shipping this dude back to his homeland.

---

The only evidence anyone has ever provided that Garcia is MS-13 came from one cop who claimed he got the info from an anonymous informant

Turns out that cop is a criminal.

https://newrepublic.com/article/194010/kilmar-abrego-garcia-case-trump-deported-error-another-hit

Quote:

---

Ivan Mendez was the officer who filled out this gang interview sheet, according to a copy of the sheet itself, which we obtained from Curiel. And Curiel tells us that repeated conversations with the P.G. County police inspector general confirmed that Mendez was a lead detective on Abrego Garcia's case.

What's more, it turns out that Mendez was suspended, in early April 2019, for "providing information to a commercial sex worker who he was paying in exchange for sexual acts." That's according to the P.G. County police's own announcement of his indictment, which came a year later, in June 2020. Strikingly, the information Mendez shared was related to "an on-going police investigation."

---

---

Oh BULLSH**

The basis for Garcia's asylum claim was he was physically in danger from a RIVAL GANG! Non gang members don't refer to other gang members as rival gangs unless they're in a rival gang.

If he was an innocent civilian he wouldn't be in fear a rival gang

Why do you keep referring to DOJ? Until January of this year, DOJ was not authorized to carry out immigration matters as those are under DHS.

CampSkunk said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

CampSkunk said:

---

He could have, but Trump's DOJ failed to secure a removal order back in 2019, which was a mistake they have admitted. So, it's not a double due process because the Trump DOJ never followed through the first time.

---

OK. So you are advocating that an illegal gang member from El Salvador who never had a right to be in America and who is now in his home country should now be brought back here to do what?

Really odd position.

---

It would be odd if that's what I stated. But that's not what I stated. I'm advocating that the Trump DOJ fix the mistake they have already admitted, go through the process of following the law, and have a proper order of removal issued. It doesn't matter that I disagree with the law, or that the guy is a scumbag, or that the judge is liberal. That's the rules and they must be followed.

---

I've asked multiple times now. What, exactly, do you expect the government to do now?

El Salvador citizen is in custody in El Salvador (and is not being paid by the U.S. for detention). Bukele said, "no."

So remedy exists?

No, he did not, in 2019. The DOJ never admitted one into the record, and after the DOJ lawyer admitted that it had been illegal to send Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, Bondi fired that lawyer. (His name is Erez Reuveni if you want to Google it). I suppose it's possible that there was a removal order that wasn't executed, but if that's the case, the DOJ would have admitted it to the record.

CampSkunk said:

---

MarkTwain said:

---

CampSkunk said:

---

agracer said:

---

Nothing in your quotes say he was "snatched off the street". Why do libs insist on adding hyperbole when trying to make a point. It's undermines anything you're trying to communicate, everyone just rolls there eyes and ignores anything else you state.

---

Let me help you out, via Google, which will tell you that "Federal immigration agents arrested Abrego Garcia, 29, on March 12 after pulling him over in an Ikea parking lot near his home in Beltsville, Maryland, about half an hour outside of Washington." So, my apologies, he was snatched out of an Ikea parking lot. If "snatched" is too harsh a criticism for you, I'll allow "taken into custody". But if I was "taken into custody" and denied due process, I would call it being "snatched." Or maybe "grabbed", "plucked", or "carried off". So, close your mind and roll your eyes.

---

NOT ALLOWED DUE PROCESS?????

He was found by an immigration court to be a member of MS13 and it was appealed and the Immigration Appeals Court also found him guilty of entering the country illegally and was found to be a member of MS13 by his own admission. He testified in court that a "rival gang (Barrio 18 Gang) was an active threat to his life. The Barrio 18 gang according to the El Salvadorian authorities, has been largely eradicated in El Salvador. It was his fear of that gang in his home neighborhood, supposedly, that was the basis for his asylum claim. The court found his asylum claim invalid and he had a deportation order issued that the last administration ignored. He was denied asylum in October 2019 for failing to file within a year of arriving as is required by statute. Garcia conceded to the court he knew he was deportable. INA statute does not allow but ONE asylum claim. The only appeal Garcia filed was for his denied bail. It was dismissed. INA statue also states once a deportee leaves US border, they are deemed deported. HE'S AN EL SALVADORIAN IN EL SALVADORIAN PRISON. Case closed, he had his due process

---

I'll say it again. The Supreme Court, the 4th Circuit, and the district court disagree with you. If the case was closed, it would be closed. But it's not, so it's not. And he did not have a removal order issued in 2019, which the DOJ has admitted.

---

Why do you keep ignoring the part where SCOTUS talked about EFFECTUATE?

aggiehawg said:

---

Why do you keep referring to DOJ? Until January of this year, DOJ was not authorized to carry out immigration matters as those are under DHS.

---

Because that's who is responding from the government in the court case involving Abrego Garcia. I suppose they are representing DHS, but in any event, it's a government lawyer.

Keep this issue at the forefront Dems. It's a winning issue for your side!! Most voters want MS-13 back in this country to terrorize and murder innocent people. Don't quit!

aggiehawg said:

---

Why do you keep referring to DOJ? Until January of this year, DOJ was not authorized to carry out immigration matters as those are under DHS.

---

Because he's not an attorney, but let him, he's "well read"!

Eye roll. He just likes to argue his party's talking points. It's like Schiff has entered the forum.

CampSkunk said:

---

No, he did not, in 2019. The DOJ never admitted one into the record, and after the DOJ lawyer admitted that it had been illegal to send Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, Bondi fired that lawyer. (His name is Erez Reuveni if you want to Google it). I suppose it's possible that there was a removal order that wasn't executed, but if that's the case, the DOJ would have admitted it to the record.

---

I SAID he had a WOR for EL SALVADOR.

But, ONLY EL SALVADOR.

They could deport him to Gilligan's Island 1 sec after he touches US soil if they brought him back.

BTW, here's what that atty said:

Quote:

---

Reuveni said in court of the government's position: "Our only arguments are jurisdictional. … He should not have been sent to El Salvador."

---

He wasn't conceding we couldn't deport him. Just that we couldn't deport him to ES.

Hullabaloonatic said:

---

carl spacklers hat said:

---

As a member of a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (MS-13), he also is not eligible for due process. Plus he has a Deportation Order. Not sure what the problem is here. Some judge back in 2019/2020 screwed up by putting a stay order on the Deportation Order. That was the mistake, not shipping this dude back to his homeland.

---

The only evidence anyone has ever provided that Garcia is MS-13 came from one cop who claimed he got the info from an anonymous informant

---

He never even denied it, and in fact used his membership as a reason for fearing the rival gang. The family had to concoct the 'pupeseria extortion' scheme with a (now eradicated) rival gang to claim El Salvador was unsafe for the poor kid.

The Case For Not Correcting The "Mistake" Of Deporting An El Salvadoran To El Salvador , by @shipwreckedcrew

This is a long look at the case of the MS-13 member deported by error.

Link in next message. pic.twitter.com/UgQx88XA6x

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) April 14, 2025

The guys doing the talking points for Democrats at DU must really have been hurt by USAID funding cuts.

If he is a prisoner of the El Salvadorans, there would be a record of his crime in El Salvador, and we wouldn't be paying El Salvador $6 Million to house the deportees. But he has been convicted of no crime in El Salvador, and they are taking our money. And the El Salvadorans have said that they will house them for up to a year until the US decides what to do with them. That means that the El Salvadorans agree that we still have control over them. Bukele is just taking the party line to support Trump's position.

Yep. Almost everything he claimed to the court was a lie.

CampSkunk said:

---

If he is a prisoner of the El Salvadorans, there would be a record of his crime in El Salvador, and we wouldn't be paying El Salvador $6 Million to house the deportees. But he has been convicted of no crime in El Salvador, and they are taking our money. And the El Salvadorans have said that they will house them for up to a year until the US decides what to do with them. That means that the El Salvadorans agree that we still have control over them. Bukele is just taking the party line to support Trump's position.

---

We're not paying to house HIM. We ARE paying to house other NON-Salvadorans.

hth

CampSkunk said:

---

If he is a prisoner of the El Salvadorans, there would be a record of his crime in El Salvador, and we wouldn't be paying El Salvador $6 Million to house the deportees. But he has been convicted of no crime in El Salvador, and they are taking our money. And the El Salvadorans have said that they will house them for up to a year until the US decides what to do with them. That means that the El Salvadorans agree that we still have control over them. Bukele is just taking the party line to support Trump's position.

---

for someone who is not a lawyer and has not read the agreement with El Salvador, you are remarkably confident in your conclusions.

And I've answered it multiple times - provide the guy with all the process he was entitled to under the law if they hadn't unlawfully sent him to El Salvador. That's not my conclusion - that's the conclusion of all three courts who have considered the case.

El Salvador has said "No". Now what?

Troy91 said:

---

CampSkunk said:

---

If he is a prisoner of the El Salvadorans, there would be a record of his crime in El Salvador, and we wouldn't be paying El Salvador $6 Million to house the deportees. But he has been convicted of no crime in El Salvador, and they are taking our money. And the El Salvadorans have said that they will house them for up to a year until the US decides what to do with them. That means that the El Salvadorans agree that we still have control over them. Bukele is just taking the party line to support Trump's position.

---

for someone who is not a lawyer and has not read the agreement with El Salvador, you are remarkably confident in your conclusions.

---

Yes, but I have read the words of the justices and the judges involved in the case, as well as commentary from various sources. I would have also read the agreement with El Salvador, but unfortunately the DOJ has failed to admit it into the record.

CampSkunk said:

---

Troy91 said:

---

CampSkunk said:

---

If he is a prisoner of the El Salvadorans, there would be a record of his crime in El Salvador, and we wouldn't be paying El Salvador $6 Million to house the deportees. But he has been convicted of no crime in El Salvador, and they are taking our money. And the El Salvadorans have said that they will house them for up to a year until the US decides what to do with them. That means that the El Salvadorans agree that we still have control over them. Bukele is just taking the party line to support Trump's position.

---

for someone who is not a lawyer and has not read the agreement with El Salvador, you are remarkably confident in your conclusions.

---

Yes, but I have read the words of the justices and the judges involved in the case, as well as commentary from various sources. I would have also read the agreement with El Salvador, but unfortunately the DOJ has failed to admit it into the record.

---

Don't let the presence or absence of actual facts slow down the constant flow of your conclusions.

Ag with kids said:

---

CampSkunk said:

---

No, he did not, in 2019. The DOJ never admitted one into the record, and after the DOJ lawyer admitted that it had been illegal to send Abrego Garcia to El Salvador, Bondi fired that lawyer. (His name is Erez Reuveni if you want to Google it). I suppose it's possible that there was a removal order that wasn't executed, but if that's the case, the DOJ would have admitted it to the record.

---

I SAID he had a WOR for EL SALVADOR.

But, ONLY EL SALVADOR.

They could deport him to Gilligan's Island 1 sec after he touches US soil if they brought him back.

BTW, here's what that atty said:

Quote:

---

Reuveni said in court of the government's position: "Our only arguments are jurisdictional. … He should not have been sent to El Salvador."

---

He wasn't conceding we couldn't deport him. Just that we couldn't deport him to ES.

---

also, that attorney was wrong and has since been removed from the file.

CampSkunk said:

---

And I've answered it multiple times - provide the guy with all the process he was entitled to under the law if they hadn't unlawfully sent him to El Salvador. That's not my conclusion - that's the conclusion of all three courts who have considered the case.

---

no, it's not. That result is based on your wild speculation. And reading your posts about detainees being held for a year and the U.S. payments, it's clear you've conflated Venezuelan tDa deportees with this el Salvadoran to help whatever argument you're trying to make hold water.

The question I want you to answer is what do you want the Trump administration to do at this point? As in actually do. The judge in this case can blast out endless tomes of angry screeds about how she doesn't like the situation. But what affirmative relief (be more specific than "give him due process" because we've all heard democrats talking points ad nauseum) can the court actually order and the U.S. can actually provide?

I'll help you out here: the answer is none (outside of working through diplomatic channels).

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

CampSkunk said:

---

And I've answered it multiple times - provide the guy with all the process he was entitled to under the law if they hadn't unlawfully sent him to El Salvador. That's not my conclusion - that's the conclusion of all three courts who have considered the case.

---

no, it's not. That result is based on your wild speculation. And reading your posts about detainees being held for a year and the U.S. payments, it's clear you've conflated Venezuelan tDa deportees with this el Salvadoran to help whatever argument you're trying to make hold water.

The question I want you to answer is what do you want the Trump administration to do at this point? As in actually do. The judge in this case can blast out endless tomes of angry screeds about how she doesn't like the situation. But what affirmative relief (be more specific than "give him due process" because we've all heard democrats talking points ad nauseum) can the court actually order and the U.S. can actually provide?

I'll help you out here: the answer is none (outside of working through diplomatic channels).

---

And what would the answer be if he were an American citizen deport due to an "administrative error"?

Repatriation I assume. But he's not so that isn't relevant.

The basis for Abrego Garcia's asylum claim was he was physically in danger from a "rival gang." If he wasn't in a gang, he would not refer to other gang members as "rival gangs." He was given due process and lost.

rgvag11 said:

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

CampSkunk said:

---

And I've answered it multiple times - provide the guy with all the process he was entitled to under the law if they hadn't unlawfully sent him to El Salvador. That's not my conclusion - that's the conclusion of all three courts who have considered the case.

---

no, it's not. That result is based on your wild speculation. And reading your posts about detainees being held for a year and the U.S. payments, it's clear you've conflated Venezuelan tDa deportees with this el Salvadoran to help whatever argument you're trying to make hold water.

The question I want you to answer is what do you want the Trump administration to do at this point? As in actually do. The judge in this case can blast out endless tomes of angry screeds about how she doesn't like the situation. But what affirmative relief (be more specific than "give him due process" because we've all heard democrats talking points ad nauseum) can the court actually order and the U.S. can actually provide?

I'll help you out here: the answer is none (outside of working through diplomatic channels).

---

And what would the answer be if he were an American citizen deport due to an "administrative error"?

---

What would be the answer if my aunt had balls?

Your question is just as relevant here.

imagine being in a gang in El Salvador illegally coming to the USA then claiming asylum based on the fact that a rival gang wants to kill me, isn't that what gang member do? What a racket I don't blame him trying to take advantage of our dumb immigration laws.

DOJ status report for today basically says: we'll admit him into us if he presents at a port of entry. He will immediately be detained and deported to a third country or back to El Salvador. lol.

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

DOJ status report for today basically says: we'll admit him into us if he presents at a port of entry. He will immediately be detained and deported to a third country or back to El Salvador. lol.

---

Thats cold.

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

DOJ status report for today basically says: we'll admit him into us if he presents at a port of entry. He will immediately be detained and deported to a third country or back to El Salvador. lol.

---

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815/gov.uscourts.mdd.578815.77.0.pdf

paragraphs 8 and 9---bienvenido...y adios

HoustonAg9999 said:

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

DOJ status report for today basically says: we'll admit him into us if he presents at a port of entry. He will immediately be detained and deported to a third country or back to El Salvador. lol.

---

Thats cold.

---

But ultimately is what would happen. This is sooo much posturing when the outcome would be the same.

samurai_science said:

---

McCarthy is pure scum and using him as some moral high bar is funny

---

Careful. You might get banned for insulting scum.