An official from the Trump administration admitted they’d got it wrong, the official was then fired for the crime of being honest. This is a person they have conceded isn’t a criminal, end of discussion.How do you know he isn't a gang member? I know you want to bash Trump all day unchallenged, but you are making yourself look very silly. Neither country wants to send him back to the US, and the fact he wasn't deported previously because he was at risk of being attacked by other gangs pretty much confirms his ties to MS-13. It wasn't because he was a lollypop man who wore a strange colour jacket and was disliked.
One of the biggest problems we have in the world today is that we have too many scumbags, and too much sympathy for them. We were only talking about Hashem Abedi and the Manchester Arena attacks five minutes ago. He shouldn't have been in the UK.
It seems odd to me that you want to fight for the rights of these people.
Surely you can see the issue? Irrespective of how he entered the country he wasn't at this point of arrest in the country illegally.
ICE arrested him on the way home from work claiming his status had changed, something even Trump has admitted was false. Despite having never been charged, let alone convicted, of any crime in the US he was then deported. Can you not see an issue with rounding people up on the streets and deporting them without any due process? The supreme court certainly can.
I can't really comment on your claim that there has been a clean up & new prisons but one of the American judges described it as "one of the most notoriously inhumane and dangerous prisons in the world" that "by design, deprives its detainees of adequate food, water, and shelter, fosters routine violence"
Even if you 100% believe he should be locked up do you not believe in due process. Do you think its fine to grab people off the streets and just send them off to another country with no prospect of them ever being returned. Who gets to decide who that applies to?
Facts don’t care about your feelings etc etcI don't have any sympathy in this case.
An official from the Trump administration admitted they’d got it wrong, the official was then fired for the crime of being honest. This is a person they have conceded isn’t a criminal, end of discussion.
Our societies are meant to work by due process to ensure only those guilty of crimes end up doing the time. If that’s now off the table, anyone can be thrown into prison at the government’s whim. I can think someone’s a prick while also defending their right to a lawyer and a fair trial.
Just how I see you not speaking against the arrest of people for protesting against Israel. Just be honest and admit you only care about the freedom when it applies to people you like and agree with.
The facts are what I based my ‘rant’ on. Though since you asked, here’s a fresh one.You don't have a clue what you are talking about. You Trump bash on here every single day and as soon as someone quotes you, you start dancing because you are really just venting without substance. I get it, Trump is a clown, and you hate him, but at least use facts rather than just pure emotion because it comes across as a bit lunatic.
To come out and say he wasn't a gang member is ridiculous. The evidence (even from several years in the past, and in different courts, shows that he is). Why are you fighting for the rights of a gangster? You do know what MS-13 do, right? If you have a better example of someone wrongfully deported that isn't a piece of shit, I would be right with you. This isn't the one.
I am well aware it was an administrate error, but it was still almost certainly the right decision. Like I said - I would hold an entirely different opinion if it was indeed the old lady from the shops - but it isn't.
I don't agree with arresting people for simply protesting if it is peaceful, and if that is what they are doing - regardless of their cause. I do have an issue with people protesting about other countries in our country all the fucking time though. That is a slightly different thing, however.
Not American though so fuck himThe facts are what I based my ‘rant’ on. Though since you asked, here’s a fresh one.
After ICE Agents Realized They Arrested the Wrong Teen in N.Y.C., They Were Told to 'Take Him Anyway': Report
Merwil Gutiérrez, 19, was deported to El Salvador despite his family’s claims that he has no criminal record or gang affiliation. The teen's father claims that ICE agents admitted Merwil wasn't their target, but were told to 'take him anyway'people.com
That's shocking, if trueThe facts are what I based my ‘rant’ on. Though since you asked, here’s a fresh one.
After ICE Agents Realized They Arrested the Wrong Teen in N.Y.C., They Were Told to 'Take Him Anyway': Report
Merwil Gutiérrez, 19, was deported to El Salvador despite his family’s claims that he has no criminal record or gang affiliation. The teen's father claims that ICE agents admitted Merwil wasn't their target, but were told to 'take him anyway'people.com
The facts are what I based my ‘rant’ on. Though since you asked, here’s a fresh one.
After ICE Agents Realized They Arrested the Wrong Teen in N.Y.C., They Were Told to 'Take Him Anyway': Report
Merwil Gutiérrez, 19, was deported to El Salvador despite his family’s claims that he has no criminal record or gang affiliation. The teen's father claims that ICE agents admitted Merwil wasn't their target, but were told to 'take him anyway'people.com
In order for someone to be deemed a criminal there has to be a process. The Trump regime is carting people off to El Salvador with no trial or due process.They weren't, because you said he 'objectively wasn't a gang member' - despite an immigration court in 2019 revieing evidence from the FBI that says he was. Like I said, you got carried away without reviewing everything properly. I would totally agree with you regarding picking up random people off the streets and deporting them, but I absolutely do not think there should be any soft approach on gangsters, jihadis, or criminals.
In the case of the example you listed now, Merwil Gutiérrez, this is one to watch. His family say he wasn't in a gang - that isn't really enough evidence on its own. It looks like he got to the US illegally, so deportation was probably inevitable anyway. If this is all incorrect, then they should sort it out certainly. I suspect however, that there is more to come out about this.
If its so open and shut that he is a criminal why the need to avoid due process?I would totally agree with you regarding picking up random people off the streets and deporting them, but I absolutely do not think there should be any soft approach on gangsters, jihadis, or criminals.
One for @Sky Blue Pete
‘And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.’
In order for someone to be deemed a criminal there has to be a process. The Trump regime is carting people off to El Salvador with no trial or due process.
If you can’t see the problem I don’t know what else to say.
It’s estimated that around 3/4 of those already sent to ES haven’t committed a crime.I can see how it could be a problem. Like I said, if Merwil Gutiérrez is innocent and also has a genuine asylum claim then they should do the right thing. I just don't buy the narrative that they are deliberately rounding up hoards of innocent people and deporting them for no reason. If there are many people being deported who have not done anything wrong then I would also agree with you.
Starmer got in by default and will last one term.Is that what Trump said when Starmer came crawling?
How do you know he is, he was charged based on an informer who said he was a gang member in New York when he had never been to New YorkHow do you know he isn't a gang member? I know you want to bash Trump all day unchallenged, but you are making yourself look very silly. Neither country wants to send him back to the US, and the fact he wasn't deported previously because he was at risk of being attacked by other gangs pretty much confirms his ties to MS-13. It wasn't because he was a lollypop man who wore a strange colour jacket and was disliked.
One of the biggest problems we have in the world today is that we have too many scumbags, and too much sympathy for them. We were only talking about Hashem Abedi and the Manchester Arena attacks five minutes ago. He shouldn't have been in the UK.
It seems odd to me that you want to fight for the rights of these people.
It’s estimated that around 3/4 of those already sent to ES haven’t committed a crime.
It’s from a 60 Minutes investigationWhat evidence is there for this?
It’s from a 60 Minutes investigation
Incoming references to 'left wing media'...
Obama is hardly left wing. He'd be centre-right in the UK.The Obama regime didn’t stop detaining people in Cuba without trial or charge - it’s hardly a political side to take
In America he is.Obama is hardly left wing.
The Obama regime didn’t stop detaining people in Cuba without trial or charge - it’s hardly a political side to take
Incoming references to 'left wing media'...
60 minutes is a pretty good platform and have done some great work. In this case however, the suggestion being made is not accurate.
And the problem is that anything coming from any part of Trump's administration cannot be trusted. That is where we are with the U.S. government - they cannot be trusted (even more so than normal).60 minutes is a pretty good platform and have done some great work. In this case however, the suggestion being made is not accurate. It is some pretty woolly investigation to one deportation flight, where the information released about the individuals is very minimal due to State Secrets Privilege. Realistically, the narrative driven conclusions being made are nonsense. It's like trying to say that Jihadi John is a good boy because in the UK and hasn't done any crime, so his beheadings in Syria can be ignored.
This is key:
"In response to our findings, a Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman said many of those without criminal records, quote "are actually terrorists, human rights abusers, gangsters, and more. They just don't have a rap sheet in the u.s."
Border Czar Tom Homan said immigration agents spent hours conducting rigorous checks on each of the men to confirm they are members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang president Trump campaigned on eradicating.
Quite a significant difference to: 75% of people deported to El Salvador being poor innocent victims that haven't done anything wrong.
Why would evidence of low-level Venezuelan gang activity be subject to state secrets privilege?60 minutes is a pretty good platform and have done some great work. In this case however, the suggestion being made is not accurate. It is some pretty woolly investigation to one deportation flight, where the information released about the individuals is very minimal due to State Secrets Privilege. Realistically, the narrative driven conclusions being made are nonsense. It's like trying to say that Jihadi John is a good boy because in the UK and hasn't done any crime, so his beheadings in Syria can be ignored.
This is key:
"In response to our findings, a Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman said many of those without criminal records, quote "are actually terrorists, human rights abusers, gangsters, and more. They just don't have a rap sheet in the u.s."
Border Czar Tom Homan said immigration agents spent hours conducting rigorous checks on each of the men to confirm they are members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang president Trump campaigned on eradicating.
Quite a significant difference to: 75% of people deported to El Salvador being poor innocent victims that haven't done anything wrong.
it's hard to trust a response from anyone that would work for Trump and co. is genuine or accurate. I get he had a role at ICE under Obama but taking a gig with Fox News in the interim isn't a great sign that he's all about truth and honesty.
comes down to trust and really, who's politics you like.
If the UK said they had sent a plane full of Albanian gangsters back home however, I would certainly think it was a good thing
I'm pretty confident many on that plane were extremely dangerous individuals.
Just hilarious levels of credulity here. Is there a word for someone who’s this trusting?Of course it could be used in a sinister way, but as untrustworthy as Trump is, I would still be surprised.
If the UK sent back a load of Albanian gangsters I'd think it was great regardless of which party was in government. However, I would like them to prove these people were gangsters before doing it.I get what you are saying. It all comes down to trust and really, who's politics you like. If the UK said they had sent a plane full of Albanian gangsters back home however, I would certainly think it was a good thing, regardless of who was in government. Sadly that is what this is. No one cared when it was a different administration, now we are suddenly outraged and making up statistics (not aimed at you).
It doesn't matter where they commited the crimes, if they are gangsters (of which these gangs do pretty despicable things), then it might be a good idea to do something about it. People can laugh all they want, or get upset, but anyone that seriously wants these people walking the streets with common-folk need their head checking. I'm pretty confident many on that plane were extremely dangerous individuals.
This might not be some people's favourable politics, I certainly don't like Trump (his treatment of Zelensky for example is a disgrace), but making shit up isn't really helpful in the argument against him or his administration. In fact, it helps him.
As for the State Secret Privilidge, if you were trying to break down networks of gangs (which was in Trumps campaign, which people voted, and he got elected for), then it might be in the best interests of the government not to release information that may compromise these actions. The whole purpose of it is to protect intelligence gathering, and national security. Of course it could be used in a sinister way, but as untrustworthy as Trump is, I would still be surprised.
If the UK sent back a load of Albanian gangsters I'd think it was great regardless of which party was in government. However, I would like them to prove these people were gangsters before doing it.
Same as I'd approve of any government taking any dangerous criminals off the street. Provided they'd had the due legal process and their guilt proven. If they haven't had that then I wouldn't approve of it, regardless of political persuasion, because that's a dangerous precedent to just let those in power decide who's guilty and who isn't without having to prove it.
Quite a few people had those coats at my school in the 90s in that period where they were popular, it's always the quiet ones.'In those proceedings, the government claimed that he was a member of the MS-13 criminal gang because "he was wearing a Chicago Bulls hat and a hoodie"'
Fuck, that's me convinced.
People who don’t know how comparisons work, you say?If this was Obama in power, I doubt we would even be having this discussion. Everything else is just really empty noise from people that aren't getting attention here, or just don't know how comparisons work.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?