Sam doesn't believe citizens have rights, only 'migrants', especially those with criminal gang membership.

gtownbear said:

---

Under your logic, why even have a legal path to citizenship? You appear to be saying that by whatever illegal means someone gains entry into our country, they are automatically afforded privileges and rights which forces taxpayers to spend massive amounts of money on their subsistence while they are here, money to hunt those down with criminal records, and then pay for the legal proceedings before we remove them. I disagree. As this sets the terrible example that the lawbreakers have more rights than legal, law abiding citizens. This runs contrary to everything we stand for.

---

I don't know where you get the idea that they have more rights than US citizens. No one said anything like that.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

gtownbear said:

---

Sam,

Please understand the position you are taking. Kilmar Garcia I believe was before the immigration courts in 2019 and was accused of being associated with the MS-13 gang. The court did not dispute that he was with the gang, but refused to deport him at that time because they thought he might be killed if sent back to El Salvador at that time. He was married to an American citizen but he was not and is not an American citizen. So I believe it is still in question whether he was associated with that gang or not.

But I will grant that he was placed on the plane where other gang members were flown out of the United States by mistake. And while I realize we have to abide by the court decisions in this country, I'm certain the Trump Administration is not conceding the fight on any of these deportation cases until all appeals are exhausted.

And I would make this case. The Biden Administration allowed in between 15,000,000-20,000,000 illegals during his four years in office. Practically none of them were vetted by law enforcement; they were just released into the country or crossed somewhere in between the ports of entry. Many of them were either gang members or had criminal records in their country of origin. Some were even on the terrorist watch list. The number could be in the hundreds of thousands or even millions that are here and willing to steal, assault, rape and yes murder our Legal Citizens.

So President Trump is elected on one of his promises to remove the illegals beginning with the gang members and hardened criminals that ICE identifies. He uses the old law that gives him the fastest and cheapest method to remove criminals who broke into our country. The ACLU and the left challenges his actions in court. Each side wins some parts of cases and loses some. Now, after this deportation case that was in Judge Boasberg's court was assigned to the Texas courts, who have evidently ruled that each person on that plane can now make the government prove that they are actually gang members who deserve to be deported. Am I close to correct so far?

My question to the Supreme Court and anyone else is by what reasoning do illegals who break into our country get the same constitutional rights as LEGAL AMERICAN CITIZENS? Think about the time and taxpayer money that it will take to go through this procedure to remove 15,000,000 illegal lawbreakers who should never have been allowed into the U.S. in the first place.

And all because the left hates President Trump and everything he stands for. Surely Sam you cannot be for these criminals staying in this country can you? If there are so many to remove, why should we as taxpayers not want it to be as quick and as cheap as possible? Will there be a few mistakes? Yes there will be. But you know as far as I am concerned, everyone who crossed our border and broke in illegally, disrespected all of us, and all of those good folks who went through the legal process to become an American citizen. In my opinion they deserve no constitutional rights; all they deserve is a free plane ride out of our country back to their country of origin.

To force all of this through the courts before any action can be taken is ridiculous. And Sam that prevents President Trump from fulfilling his promise to the people, which of course is the left's intent. After all about 75% of the public wants all of the illegals removed from the country, including many democrats.

---

What is the basic principle underlying the Bill of Rights? The state is more dangerous to you than the criminal (including the immigrant).

Why do criminals have the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure? Why do they have the right not to incriminate themselves? Why does the state have to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? Is it because we want dangerous criminals to go free?

No. It's because we don't want the state abusing its power. That's why illegal immigrants have many of the same rights as American citizens. Not to protect them. To protect you.

Trump wants to send American citizens to foreign prison camps too. He would have you believe the court system is broken, so you have to give him all the power. Don't believe it. The courts aren't perfect, but they are capable of doing their job.

---

As we have seen in recent weeks, your post is waaay off base. Illegal aliens should be deported immediately, no court date. They are just that, ILLEGAL. And nearly all the folk recently deported to El Salvador are members of 'terrorist organizations', legally defined groups, including the MS 13 fella. They should also be deported ASAP, not held in jails were they train the legal US citizens how to become terrorists. No in American jails where liberal judges can put them back in society at the drop of a hat. Unless we correct this, we will be paying millions to billions of dollars in legal fees due to your mindset.

---

As the high court recently reminded us, that is incorrect. You need hearings to determine who's illegal and who's a terrorist in the first place. Otherwise you're assuming that which is to be proved, a basic logical error.

---

Illegal is illegal. Terrorists are terrorists.

---

And blind faith is blind faith, which is what you have in government if you simply take their word without proof.

I thought it was the leftists who loved big government.

---

You left off the rest of the post;

Quote:

---

Keeping them here simply means waiting until a liberal judge put them back in society. At that point, anyone that share that train of thought also shares in the murders and rapes and robberies that they commit. And keep them here longer, means them training the next generations of home grown terrorists while they are in prison

---

---

It's just another example of the illogic and hysteria that Trump has propagated. No one is saying that dangerous criminals should be let loose in society. There are legitimate, legal ways to deport people who need to be deported. But again, without due process YOU DON'T KNOW who's a violent criminal and who isn't.

---

Sam, have you not been watching the news? Liberal judges are letting these MS 13 and Venezuelan gang members go free after they have been locked up. Soros has soured our legal system well past breaking point They only way to do that is Deport. If they are illegally in our country, deport. If they commit a crime, deport. Our women are getting raped, murdered by getting their heads smashed in with rocks, burned alive on subways. It will not stop and the legal system simply cand't handle it. Wait until this happens to your kin or one of your church members or neighbors. This is horrible!

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

gtownbear said:

---

Sam,

Please understand the position you are taking. Kilmar Garcia I believe was before the immigration courts in 2019 and was accused of being associated with the MS-13 gang. The court did not dispute that he was with the gang, but refused to deport him at that time because they thought he might be killed if sent back to El Salvador at that time. He was married to an American citizen but he was not and is not an American citizen. So I believe it is still in question whether he was associated with that gang or not.

But I will grant that he was placed on the plane where other gang members were flown out of the United States by mistake. And while I realize we have to abide by the court decisions in this country, I'm certain the Trump Administration is not conceding the fight on any of these deportation cases until all appeals are exhausted.

And I would make this case. The Biden Administration allowed in between 15,000,000-20,000,000 illegals during his four years in office. Practically none of them were vetted by law enforcement; they were just released into the country or crossed somewhere in between the ports of entry. Many of them were either gang members or had criminal records in their country of origin. Some were even on the terrorist watch list. The number could be in the hundreds of thousands or even millions that are here and willing to steal, assault, rape and yes murder our Legal Citizens.

So President Trump is elected on one of his promises to remove the illegals beginning with the gang members and hardened criminals that ICE identifies. He uses the old law that gives him the fastest and cheapest method to remove criminals who broke into our country. The ACLU and the left challenges his actions in court. Each side wins some parts of cases and loses some. Now, after this deportation case that was in Judge Boasberg's court was assigned to the Texas courts, who have evidently ruled that each person on that plane can now make the government prove that they are actually gang members who deserve to be deported. Am I close to correct so far?

My question to the Supreme Court and anyone else is by what reasoning do illegals who break into our country get the same constitutional rights as LEGAL AMERICAN CITIZENS? Think about the time and taxpayer money that it will take to go through this procedure to remove 15,000,000 illegal lawbreakers who should never have been allowed into the U.S. in the first place.

And all because the left hates President Trump and everything he stands for. Surely Sam you cannot be for these criminals staying in this country can you? If there are so many to remove, why should we as taxpayers not want it to be as quick and as cheap as possible? Will there be a few mistakes? Yes there will be. But you know as far as I am concerned, everyone who crossed our border and broke in illegally, disrespected all of us, and all of those good folks who went through the legal process to become an American citizen. In my opinion they deserve no constitutional rights; all they deserve is a free plane ride out of our country back to their country of origin.

To force all of this through the courts before any action can be taken is ridiculous. And Sam that prevents President Trump from fulfilling his promise to the people, which of course is the left's intent. After all about 75% of the public wants all of the illegals removed from the country, including many democrats.

---

What is the basic principle underlying the Bill of Rights? The state is more dangerous to you than the criminal (including the immigrant).

Why do criminals have the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure? Why do they have the right not to incriminate themselves? Why does the state have to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? Is it because we want dangerous criminals to go free?

No. It's because we don't want the state abusing its power. That's why illegal immigrants have many of the same rights as American citizens. Not to protect them. To protect you.

Trump wants to send American citizens to foreign prison camps too. He would have you believe the court system is broken, so you have to give him all the power. Don't believe it. The courts aren't perfect, but they are capable of doing their job.

---

As we have seen in recent weeks, your post is waaay off base. Illegal aliens should be deported immediately, no court date. They are just that, ILLEGAL. And nearly all the folk recently deported to El Salvador are members of 'terrorist organizations', legally defined groups, including the MS 13 fella. They should also be deported ASAP, not held in jails were they train the legal US citizens how to become terrorists. No in American jails where liberal judges can put them back in society at the drop of a hat. Unless we correct this, we will be paying millions to billions of dollars in legal fees due to your mindset.

---

As the high court recently reminded us, that is incorrect. You need hearings to determine who's illegal and who's a terrorist in the first place. Otherwise you're assuming that which is to be proved, a basic logical error.

---

Illegal is illegal. Terrorists are terrorists.

---

And blind faith is blind faith, which is what you have in government if you simply take their word without proof.

I thought it was the leftists who loved big government.

---

You left off the rest of the post;

Quote:

---

Keeping them here simply means waiting until a liberal judge put them back in society. At that point, anyone that share that train of thought also shares in the murders and rapes and robberies that they commit. And keep them here longer, means them training the next generations of home grown terrorists while they are in prison

---

---

It's just another example of the illogic and hysteria that Trump has propagated. No one is saying that dangerous criminals should be let loose in society. There are legitimate, legal ways to deport people who need to be deported. But again, without due process YOU DON'T KNOW who's a violent criminal and who isn't.

---

Sam, have you not been watching the news? Liberal judges are letting these MS 13 and Venezuelan gang members go free after they have been locked up. Soros has soured our legal system well past breaking point They only way to do that is Deport. If they are illegally in our country, deport. If they commit a crime, deport. Our women are getting raped, murdered by getting their heads smashed in with rocks, burned alive on subways. It will not stop and the legal system simply cand't handle it. Wait until this happens to your kin or one of your church members or neighbors. This is horrible!

---

The operative word being "if." That's what courts are there to determine.

I don't know what the MAGA sites have been telling you, but no, I've heard no news that courts are unwilling or unable to do their jobs. If that's the case then it's a problem that needs to be fixed, not exploited by a lawless demagogue.

BearFan33 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

gtownbear said:

---

Sam,

Please understand the position you are taking. Kilmar Garcia I believe was before the immigration courts in 2019 and was accused of being associated with the MS-13 gang. The court did not dispute that he was with the gang, but refused to deport him at that time because they thought he might be killed if sent back to El Salvador at that time. He was married to an American citizen but he was not and is not an American citizen. So I believe it is still in question whether he was associated with that gang or not.

But I will grant that he was placed on the plane where other gang members were flown out of the United States by mistake. And while I realize we have to abide by the court decisions in this country, I'm certain the Trump Administration is not conceding the fight on any of these deportation cases until all appeals are exhausted.

And I would make this case. The Biden Administration allowed in between 15,000,000-20,000,000 illegals during his four years in office. Practically none of them were vetted by law enforcement; they were just released into the country or crossed somewhere in between the ports of entry. Many of them were either gang members or had criminal records in their country of origin. Some were even on the terrorist watch list. The number could be in the hundreds of thousands or even millions that are here and willing to steal, assault, rape and yes murder our Legal Citizens.

So President Trump is elected on one of his promises to remove the illegals beginning with the gang members and hardened criminals that ICE identifies. He uses the old law that gives him the fastest and cheapest method to remove criminals who broke into our country. The ACLU and the left challenges his actions in court. Each side wins some parts of cases and loses some. Now, after this deportation case that was in Judge Boasberg's court was assigned to the Texas courts, who have evidently ruled that each person on that plane can now make the government prove that they are actually gang members who deserve to be deported. Am I close to correct so far?

My question to the Supreme Court and anyone else is by what reasoning do illegals who break into our country get the same constitutional rights as LEGAL AMERICAN CITIZENS? Think about the time and taxpayer money that it will take to go through this procedure to remove 15,000,000 illegal lawbreakers who should never have been allowed into the U.S. in the first place.

And all because the left hates President Trump and everything he stands for. Surely Sam you cannot be for these criminals staying in this country can you? If there are so many to remove, why should we as taxpayers not want it to be as quick and as cheap as possible? Will there be a few mistakes? Yes there will be. But you know as far as I am concerned, everyone who crossed our border and broke in illegally, disrespected all of us, and all of those good folks who went through the legal process to become an American citizen. In my opinion they deserve no constitutional rights; all they deserve is a free plane ride out of our country back to their country of origin.

To force all of this through the courts before any action can be taken is ridiculous. And Sam that prevents President Trump from fulfilling his promise to the people, which of course is the left's intent. After all about 75% of the public wants all of the illegals removed from the country, including many democrats.

---

What is the basic principle underlying the Bill of Rights? The state is more dangerous to you than the criminal (including the immigrant).

Why do criminals have the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure? Why do they have the right not to incriminate themselves? Why does the state have to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? Is it because we want dangerous criminals to go free?

No. It's because we don't want the state abusing its power. That's why illegal immigrants have many of the same rights as American citizens. Not to protect them. To protect you.

Trump wants to send American citizens to foreign prison camps too. He would have you believe the court system is broken, so you have to give him all the power. Don't believe it. The courts aren't perfect, but they are capable of doing their job.

---

Ridiculous statement. Obama vaporized an American citizen in Yemen with no trial or legal proceedings whatsoever. It's people on the left you should be worried about.

---

It may be ridiculous, but it's what Trump said. It wasn't just an off-the-cuff remark, either. His press secretary confirmed that he's been discussing it privately for some time.

Either Sam is part of MS13 or he wants MS13 neighbors.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

gtownbear said:

---

Sam,

Please understand the position you are taking. Kilmar Garcia I believe was before the immigration courts in 2019 and was accused of being associated with the MS-13 gang. The court did not dispute that he was with the gang, but refused to deport him at that time because they thought he might be killed if sent back to El Salvador at that time. He was married to an American citizen but he was not and is not an American citizen. So I believe it is still in question whether he was associated with that gang or not.

But I will grant that he was placed on the plane where other gang members were flown out of the United States by mistake. And while I realize we have to abide by the court decisions in this country, I'm certain the Trump Administration is not conceding the fight on any of these deportation cases until all appeals are exhausted.

And I would make this case. The Biden Administration allowed in between 15,000,000-20,000,000 illegals during his four years in office. Practically none of them were vetted by law enforcement; they were just released into the country or crossed somewhere in between the ports of entry. Many of them were either gang members or had criminal records in their country of origin. Some were even on the terrorist watch list. The number could be in the hundreds of thousands or even millions that are here and willing to steal, assault, rape and yes murder our Legal Citizens.

So President Trump is elected on one of his promises to remove the illegals beginning with the gang members and hardened criminals that ICE identifies. He uses the old law that gives him the fastest and cheapest method to remove criminals who broke into our country. The ACLU and the left challenges his actions in court. Each side wins some parts of cases and loses some. Now, after this deportation case that was in Judge Boasberg's court was assigned to the Texas courts, who have evidently ruled that each person on that plane can now make the government prove that they are actually gang members who deserve to be deported. Am I close to correct so far?

My question to the Supreme Court and anyone else is by what reasoning do illegals who break into our country get the same constitutional rights as LEGAL AMERICAN CITIZENS? Think about the time and taxpayer money that it will take to go through this procedure to remove 15,000,000 illegal lawbreakers who should never have been allowed into the U.S. in the first place.

And all because the left hates President Trump and everything he stands for. Surely Sam you cannot be for these criminals staying in this country can you? If there are so many to remove, why should we as taxpayers not want it to be as quick and as cheap as possible? Will there be a few mistakes? Yes there will be. But you know as far as I am concerned, everyone who crossed our border and broke in illegally, disrespected all of us, and all of those good folks who went through the legal process to become an American citizen. In my opinion they deserve no constitutional rights; all they deserve is a free plane ride out of our country back to their country of origin.

To force all of this through the courts before any action can be taken is ridiculous. And Sam that prevents President Trump from fulfilling his promise to the people, which of course is the left's intent. After all about 75% of the public wants all of the illegals removed from the country, including many democrats.

---

What is the basic principle underlying the Bill of Rights? The state is more dangerous to you than the criminal (including the immigrant).

Why do criminals have the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure? Why do they have the right not to incriminate themselves? Why does the state have to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? Is it because we want dangerous criminals to go free?

No. It's because we don't want the state abusing its power. That's why illegal immigrants have many of the same rights as American citizens. Not to protect them. To protect you.

Trump wants to send American citizens to foreign prison camps too. He would have you believe the court system is broken, so you have to give him all the power. Don't believe it. The courts aren't perfect, but they are capable of doing their job.

---

As we have seen in recent weeks, your post is waaay off base. Illegal aliens should be deported immediately, no court date. They are just that, ILLEGAL. And nearly all the folk recently deported to El Salvador are members of 'terrorist organizations', legally defined groups, including the MS 13 fella. They should also be deported ASAP, not held in jails were they train the legal US citizens how to become terrorists. No in American jails where liberal judges can put them back in society at the drop of a hat. Unless we correct this, we will be paying millions to billions of dollars in legal fees due to your mindset.

---

As the high court recently reminded us, that is incorrect. You need hearings to determine who's illegal and who's a terrorist in the first place. Otherwise you're assuming that which is to be proved, a basic logical error.

---

Illegal is illegal. Terrorists are terrorists.

---

And blind faith is blind faith, which is what you have in government if you simply take their word without proof.

I thought it was the leftists who loved big government.

---

You left off the rest of the post;

Quote:

---

Keeping them here simply means waiting until a liberal judge put them back in society. At that point, anyone that share that train of thought also shares in the murders and rapes and robberies that they commit. And keep them here longer, means them training the next generations of home grown terrorists while they are in prison

---

---

It's just another example of the illogic and hysteria that Trump has propagated. No one is saying that dangerous criminals should be let loose in society. There are legitimate, legal ways to deport people who need to be deported. But again, without due process YOU DON'T KNOW who's a violent criminal and who isn't.

---

Sam, have you not been watching the news? Liberal judges are letting these MS 13 and Venezuelan gang members go free after they have been locked up. Soros has soured our legal system well past breaking point They only way to do that is Deport. If they are illegally in our country, deport. If they commit a crime, deport. Our women are getting raped, murdered by getting their heads smashed in with rocks, burned alive on subways. It will not stop and the legal system simply cand't handle it. Wait until this happens to your kin or one of your church members or neighbors. This is horrible!

---

The operative word being "if." That's what courts are there to determine.

I don't know what the MAGA sites have been telling you, but no, I've heard no news that courts are unwilling or unable to do their jobs. If that's the case then it's a problem that needs to be fixed, not exploited by a lawless demagogue.

---

No the operative word is not "if", it's "illegal". You might want to look that word up in your law books

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

gtownbear said:

---

Sam,

Please understand the position you are taking. Kilmar Garcia I believe was before the immigration courts in 2019 and was accused of being associated with the MS-13 gang. The court did not dispute that he was with the gang, but refused to deport him at that time because they thought he might be killed if sent back to El Salvador at that time. He was married to an American citizen but he was not and is not an American citizen. So I believe it is still in question whether he was associated with that gang or not.

But I will grant that he was placed on the plane where other gang members were flown out of the United States by mistake. And while I realize we have to abide by the court decisions in this country, I'm certain the Trump Administration is not conceding the fight on any of these deportation cases until all appeals are exhausted.

And I would make this case. The Biden Administration allowed in between 15,000,000-20,000,000 illegals during his four years in office. Practically none of them were vetted by law enforcement; they were just released into the country or crossed somewhere in between the ports of entry. Many of them were either gang members or had criminal records in their country of origin. Some were even on the terrorist watch list. The number could be in the hundreds of thousands or even millions that are here and willing to steal, assault, rape and yes murder our Legal Citizens.

So President Trump is elected on one of his promises to remove the illegals beginning with the gang members and hardened criminals that ICE identifies. He uses the old law that gives him the fastest and cheapest method to remove criminals who broke into our country. The ACLU and the left challenges his actions in court. Each side wins some parts of cases and loses some. Now, after this deportation case that was in Judge Boasberg's court was assigned to the Texas courts, who have evidently ruled that each person on that plane can now make the government prove that they are actually gang members who deserve to be deported. Am I close to correct so far?

My question to the Supreme Court and anyone else is by what reasoning do illegals who break into our country get the same constitutional rights as LEGAL AMERICAN CITIZENS? Think about the time and taxpayer money that it will take to go through this procedure to remove 15,000,000 illegal lawbreakers who should never have been allowed into the U.S. in the first place.

And all because the left hates President Trump and everything he stands for. Surely Sam you cannot be for these criminals staying in this country can you? If there are so many to remove, why should we as taxpayers not want it to be as quick and as cheap as possible? Will there be a few mistakes? Yes there will be. But you know as far as I am concerned, everyone who crossed our border and broke in illegally, disrespected all of us, and all of those good folks who went through the legal process to become an American citizen. In my opinion they deserve no constitutional rights; all they deserve is a free plane ride out of our country back to their country of origin.

To force all of this through the courts before any action can be taken is ridiculous. And Sam that prevents President Trump from fulfilling his promise to the people, which of course is the left's intent. After all about 75% of the public wants all of the illegals removed from the country, including many democrats.

---

What is the basic principle underlying the Bill of Rights? The state is more dangerous to you than the criminal (including the immigrant).

Why do criminals have the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure? Why do they have the right not to incriminate themselves? Why does the state have to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? Is it because we want dangerous criminals to go free?

No. It's because we don't want the state abusing its power. That's why illegal immigrants have many of the same rights as American citizens. Not to protect them. To protect you.

Trump wants to send American citizens to foreign prison camps too. He would have you believe the court system is broken, so you have to give him all the power. Don't believe it. The courts aren't perfect, but they are capable of doing their job.

---

As we have seen in recent weeks, your post is waaay off base. Illegal aliens should be deported immediately, no court date. They are just that, ILLEGAL. And nearly all the folk recently deported to El Salvador are members of 'terrorist organizations', legally defined groups, including the MS 13 fella. They should also be deported ASAP, not held in jails were they train the legal US citizens how to become terrorists. No in American jails where liberal judges can put them back in society at the drop of a hat. Unless we correct this, we will be paying millions to billions of dollars in legal fees due to your mindset.

---

As the high court recently reminded us, that is incorrect. You need hearings to determine who's illegal and who's a terrorist in the first place. Otherwise you're assuming that which is to be proved, a basic logical error.

---

Illegal is illegal. Terrorists are terrorists.

---

And blind faith is blind faith, which is what you have in government if you simply take their word without proof.

I thought it was the leftists who loved big government.

---

You left off the rest of the post;

Quote:

---

Keeping them here simply means waiting until a liberal judge put them back in society. At that point, anyone that share that train of thought also shares in the murders and rapes and robberies that they commit. And keep them here longer, means them training the next generations of home grown terrorists while they are in prison

---

---

It's just another example of the illogic and hysteria that Trump has propagated. No one is saying that dangerous criminals should be let loose in society. There are legitimate, legal ways to deport people who need to be deported. But again, without due process YOU DON'T KNOW who's a violent criminal and who isn't.

---

Sam, have you not been watching the news? Liberal judges are letting these MS 13 and Venezuelan gang members go free after they have been locked up. Soros has soured our legal system well past breaking point They only way to do that is Deport. If they are illegally in our country, deport. If they commit a crime, deport. Our women are getting raped, murdered by getting their heads smashed in with rocks, burned alive on subways. It will not stop and the legal system simply cand't handle it. Wait until this happens to your kin or one of your church members or neighbors. This is horrible!

---

The operative word being "if." That's what courts are there to determine.

I don't know what the MAGA sites have been telling you, but no, I've heard no news that courts are unwilling or unable to do their jobs. If that's the case then it's a problem that needs to be fixed, not exploited by a lawless demagogue.

---

No the operative word is not "if", it's "illegal". You might want to look that word up in your law books

---

Sorry, I just can't trust the deep state as much as you do.

Sam says: "I just can't trust the deep state as much as you do."


Sam means: 'I protect the Deep State at every opportunity when they work as judges'.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam says: "I just can't trust the deep state as much as you do."


Sam means: 'I protect the Deep State at every opportunity when they work as judges'.

---

It's a bit strange, isn't it?

Assassin said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam says: "I just can't trust the deep state as much as you do."


Sam means: 'I protect the Deep State at every opportunity when they work as judges'.

---

It's a bit strange, isn't it?

---

More than a bit, considering that judges work in public and are not part of the deep state by definition. But who ever knows what Old83 is thinking?

"But again, without due process YOU DON'T KNOW who's a violent criminal and who isn't."

Actually sometimes without due process we do know who are criminals. This is because ICE tracks the arrests of illegals around the country working with local law enforcement agencies. They are constantly taking illegals into custody so they do know many of the criminals within the illegal population without court hearings. And their mission is to do just that. Round up the illegal criminals to keep legal American citizens safe through to the deportation process. In addition many of these illegal criminals have not shown up to their hearings where a judge pronounced a deportation order on them. Sadly the sanctuary cities do not turn these criminals over to ICE when they are arrested for some offense and ICE has to hunt them down putting numerous folks at risk.

So actually it is not the simple court proceeding that you portray. These animals are weaved into our society and neighborhoods and have to be hunted down by some or many law enforcement agencies. Most of these illegals are armed to the teeth and many times law enforcement personnel are wounded or killed attempting to arrest these jerks before they would even get to a courtroom. Thus my claim that they are receiving more rights that American citizens. My question is why should I be concerned about the rights of many folks who murder and criminalize our American citizens that did not belong here in the first place? Who do our citizens go to for justice over losing a family member needlessly? Where is their court hearing for that?

Let's put things in the proper perspective here.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam says: "I just can't trust the deep state as much as you do."


Sam means: 'I protect the Deep State at every opportunity when they work as judges'.

---

It's a bit strange, isn't it?

---

More than a bit, considering that judges work in public and are not part of the deep state by definition. But who ever knows what Old83 is thinking?

---

I pay attention to that document you ignore Sam, the one we call our Constitution.

Judges have no business trying to replace the President, nor does the Constitution say anywhere that a district judge can impose national orders.

That's the essence of the Deep State: unelected people doing things no voter approved.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Assassin said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam says: "I just can't trust the deep state as much as you do."


Sam means: 'I protect the Deep State at every opportunity when they work as judges'.

---

It's a bit strange, isn't it?

---

More than a bit, considering that judges work in public and are not part of the deep state by definition. But who ever knows what Old83 is thinking?

---

"Deep State" are potential, unauthorized and possibly even secret networks of power operating independently of a state's political leadership in pursuit of their own agendas and goals.

Yet it still sounds a lot like this crop of judges purely attempting blockades for the Democrat party, doesn't it? The Soros Deep State crew, aka Open Society, aka One World Order.

This is George Soros, he bought and paid for these judges. Follow the money

gtownbear said:

---

"But again, without due process YOU DON'T KNOW who's a violent criminal and who isn't."

Actually sometimes without due process we do know who are criminals. This is because ICE tracks the arrests of illegals around the country working with local law enforcement agencies. They are constantly taking illegals into custody so they do know many of the criminals within the illegal population without court hearings. And their mission is to do just that. Round up the illegal criminals to keep legal American citizens safe through to the deportation process. In addition many of these illegal criminals have not shown up to their hearings where a judge pronounced a deportation order on them. Sadly the sanctuary cities do not turn these criminals over to ICE when they are arrested for some offense and ICE has to hunt them down putting numerous folks at risk.

So actually it is not the simple court proceeding that you portray. These animals are weaved into our society and neighborhoods and have to be hunted down by some or many law enforcement agencies. Most of these illegals are armed to the teeth and many times law enforcement personnel are wounded or killed attempting to arrest these jerks before they would even get to a courtroom. Thus my claim that they are receiving more rights that American citizens. My question is why should I be concerned about the rights of many folks who murder and criminalize our American citizens that did not belong here in the first place? Who do our citizens go to for justice over losing a family member needlessly? Where is their court hearing for that?

Let's put things in the proper perspective here.

---

Police also track criminals who are American born and bred. They constantly take them into custody. They hunt them down. Sometimes the criminals are armed. Sometimes police are wounded or killed. Nothing you're saying is any different from how we treat citizens.

The reason you should be concerned about their rights is that we all live under the same law. Their rights are your rights. We don't have two governments, one for you and one for them.

Get over yourself. Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption and denying it just makes you look stupid..

or complicit.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get over yourself. Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption and denying it just makes you look stupid..

or complicit.

---

?

Never heard of this before. Makes sense if we want to keep out the criminal illegal aliens that have cost Americans so much

🚨President Trump just authorized the Dept of Defense to militarize the “Roosevelt Reservation” along the US border in CA, AZ, and NM

This means the 60 foot buffer zone on a 700 mile stretch of our border will now be considered military property and troops can seize illegals to… pic.twitter.com/9MrRq9iMYT

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) April 11, 2025

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

---

Judge ruled that Khalil, the Columbia grad, can be deported.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

---

So the Constitution is overruled by unelected judges?

Not buying it.

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

---

Judge ruled that Khalil, the Columbia grad, can be deported.

---

So not all judges are bad.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

---

Judge ruled that Khalil, the Columbia grad, can be deported.

---

So not all judges are bad.

---

A judge ruling on policy?

Osodecentx said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

---

Judge ruled that Khalil, the Columbia grad, can be deported.

---

So not all judges are bad.

---

A judge ruling on policy?

---

Uh-oh!

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

---

So the Constitution is overruled by unelected judges?

Not buying it.

---

The judges are doing their best to uphold the Constitution. That's why MAGA is so angry. The Constitution has a tendency to check, or at least slow, the worst impulses of the mob.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

---

Judge ruled that Khalil, the Columbia grad, can be deported.

---

So not all judges are bad.

---

Some judges actually follow the law.

Sam: "The judges are doing their best to uphold the Constitution"

B ull sh it

GrowlTowel said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

---

Judge ruled that Khalil, the Columbia grad, can be deported.

---

So not all judges are bad.

---

Some judges actually follow the law.

---

And until recently we could expect judges to follow the law.

But Sam and his vermin buddies have found a way to weaponize the law to hurt the law-abiding, in the guise of 'matters of policy'.

Oldbear83 said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Judges trying to control policy is pure corruption

---

Obviously wrong. Judges have always ruled on matters of policy.

---

Judge ruled that Khalil, the Columbia grad, can be deported.

---

So not all judges are bad.

---

Some judges actually follow the law.

---

And until recently we could expect judges to follow the law.

But Sam and his vermin buddies have found a way to weaponize the law to hurt the law-abiding, in the guise of 'matters of policy'.

---

Show us where the Founding Fathers hurt you.

Serious question…is there anyone who loves Trump but doesn't fear and loathe our constitutional rights?

There must be at least one somewhere.

Apparently you have to love criminals to work at Starbucks

Starbucks employees left a MESSAGE for Donald Trump..

Employees all across the US “stopped working for a few minutes”, to protest illegal immigrants being deported.

👀 pic.twitter.com/sXsmbNjsd6

— American AF 🇺🇸 (@iAnonPatriot) April 11, 2025

Try reading the Constitution, Sam. Then when you're brave enough, you can read what the Founding Fathers had to say about tyrant judges.

Or you can just lie and pretend black robes > the Constitution as you have all year so far.

I think we know which way you'll go.

Robert Wilson said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

I don't know about you, but we conservatives are on the defensive because that's the nature of conservatism. We conserve and defend traditions like the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Trump is no conservative. He is one of the radicals (they exist on both the left and the right) who want to undermine the rule of law and convince you that our traditions are obsolete.

Immigrants have always been a big part of our society and economy. They're not going to destroy the country in the time it takes to hold a court hearing. If you don't think Biden allocated enough resources to handle the backlog, guess what? Trump is president now. This is his chance to fix the problem within the bounds of the law. It's not a difficult concept.

But he doesn't particularly want to do that. He'd rather stoke fears and scapegoat minorities so he can grab more and more power. History should teach you where that path leads.

---

Sam, you are not conservative. You're an institutionalist.

---

Pretty sure I stopped supporting the RINO establishment a long time before you did. You finally figured out they weren't serving your interests, so congratulations. But casting your lot with a demagogue instead doesn't make you conservative. You just like a slightly different flavor of authoritarianism.

Rachel Morin murder: Jury finds illegal immigrant guilty of killing joggerhttps://t.co/7IpHLpNLzF

— Fox News (@FoxNews) April 14, 2025

It looks like Kilmar Garcia was in fact a member of MS-13 Gang, even though the administration made a clerical error in his case. He did have a deportation order at one point and was removed from our country. To which I say good riddance.

I find it troubling that the Supreme Court is telling the Trump administration to attempt to bring Garcia back to the United States. The President of El Salvador answered that today. Forget about it. He said why would he smuggle a terrorist back into the United States. Does the Supreme Court think we can now interfere in the policies of another country? Kilmar Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador. He is not a citizen of the United States. For whatever reason he is now under the control of the country he is a citizen of and we thankfully are rid of one more terrorist gang member. Personally I see this as a win/win.

And the lesson that what we thought was a good 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court is not so at all. What we have is two swing votes in Roberts and Barrett who could vote with the three liberals on any issue. We have a judiciary that is out of control folks. They are not only willing to take over our Executive Branch by judging what our President can and cannot do, but they are evidently also willing to tell the El Salvador President what he can do! I'll take $500 Alex on whether to laugh or cry!

"I find it troubling that the Supreme Court is telling the Trump administration to attempt to bring Garcia back to the United States."

Actually, if you pay attention to what exactly was said, the SCOTUS never said that.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a949_lkhn.pdf

Key parts of the opinion:

"The application is granted in part and denied in part, subject to the direction of this order. "

And here's the meat of it:

"the Government's emergency application is effectively granted in part and the deadline in the challenged order is no longer effective. The rest of the District Court's order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand. The order properly requires the Government to "facilitate" Abrego Garcia's release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term "effectuate" in the District Court's order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court's authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs."

(Bold emphasis added)

That clause about the limits to the District Court's authority is SCOTUS politely reminding the district judge that foreign policy decisions are strictly Article II territory. Note that the last sentence reaffirms this point.

Now the media has assumed that 'facilitating' Garcia's "release from custody in El Salvador", means returning him to the United States, but that is not really said anywhere.

For one thing, Garcia is not a legal citizen or resident, and therefore has no right to enter the United States, even if the deportation to El Salvador was in error. Note also that there was already a valid deportation order in effect; only the fact that he was sent to El Salvador earned the court's scrutiny. As a result, the court could only order the US Government to 'facilitate' Garcia's release from El Salvadoran custody. The problem here is that even the US Supreme Court cannot order a foreign government to release a prisoner in their custody.

So, unless the government of El Salvador decides to let Garcia go or hand him over to the US Government, this is for all serious purposes a moot point.

That is, except that the District judge needs to understand the limits of jurisdiction, and the SCOTUS may rebuke the US Government and warn that any similar future situations would provoke consequences. In this regard, it makes sense that the Government would say that the transport of Garcia to El Salvador was an accident, as that would make it unreasonable for the court to take any further actions.