I feel a slight contrarian pull despite agreeing with much of what was said. I think we’ve reached a point where we will just be treading water until those taking a dissident position are willing to acknowledge the following:
(a) The public sees through the hysteria game. It’s over. It’s done. There would still be the exact same amount of outcry had the admin deported him to a country other than El Salvador, as they were legally allowed to do. If the legality was an issue, the wall to wall coverage would be about the barbarity of sending someone “to a country they’ve never visited”.
(b) Specify what proper deportation of long-term illegal residents should look like. Are all the people just arguing that an illegal immigrant should have been deported to another country? That doesn’t really align with the legal OR moral arguments that are being made.
(c) Endless “discussion” avoids action. We’ve been stuck here forever. No one is asking for anyone’s permission to have a conversation about immigration policies, they’ve been having those conversations. Washington has ignored the brewing problem like they do all of the other existential problems. This is the very phenomenon that made it possible for Trump to ascend in the first place, and it seems like A LOT of people still don’t get it.
(d) The cases in question are not nearly as clear legally OR morally as the vast majority of people are trying to make them out to be. A lot of the same people who now find themselves very concerned with the law and Constitution have historically gone out of their way to justify all sorts of unconstitutional and illegal behavior. People are never going to forget this. The best chance they have is to avoid turning it into a criticism of Trump and make it about the issue itself as a matter of principle. I am not sure they have the ability to do so, since I think Trump is the animating factor for them caring about most of what they talk about at all. As long as the deciding factor for what constitutes a “crisis” comes down to who’s sitting in the Oval Office, the problem will continue to get worse.
Trump understands exactly why he was elected: to ACT. It would really help if his critics understood it as well and built their argument around more than “we can have a conversation about these issues”. Thanks, but no one was asking for your permission in the first place. They’re done talking. I really wish political commentators would let themselves understand this and build their arguments accordingly.
I agree with your point. I would really like to see a counter argument that explains what actually happened and then says what actually should happen. Almost every counter argument I’ve seen has implied that US citizens were picked off the street because they have tattoos. I’m not even sure what to do with that. There is no place to start. It would be really nice if some of the very smart people out there would actually give a nuanced proposal. Something that explains the current reality (not just a political bashing argument) and gives us a real place that we can go from there. My brain would really appreciate that sort of argument.
What sources are you reading that are acting like US citizens have already been deported? Every story I’ve read from CNN, NPR, and The Atlantic have been pretty clear about what’s happened so far.
What should have happened? Setting aside my own policy preferences, the Trump administration should have went through established procedures to revoke Garcia’s protected status before deporting him to El Salvador, and they should give people being deported under the Alien Enemies Act the proper notice and opportunity to appeal their designation as alien enemies. In short, just follow the law.
I can’t remember where I originally read that. What I had in mind when I wrote this comment was this scary podcast. They talk about this man being deported for quite a while, and leave the impression that he was just an American citizen about his business. I would’ve liked to seen them explain the whole situation during this conversation. I don’t feel like these guys too often take shortcuts, but it seems like lately. They’ve been leaving out important details of the stories they discuss.
I think every story - and there are hundreds - that simply call Garcia a "Maryland man" is being deceptive that he was an illegal immigrant that was ruled a deportable alien by an immigration judge.
That's like calling a tourist a "Maryland man" just because they happened to be in Maryland, which no one would do even though the tourist has more of a legal right to be there than Garcia did.
Yes you agree with that point because you’re a fucking moron who pre admits you have no fucking clue what should happen (yet agree with the the rested Chris and his ultra dipshit’s points). Here’s what should have happened:
Before Garcia could legally be removed to El Salvador, ICE needed to prove he was not a U.S. citizen, get a valid removal order from an immigration judge, and give him full access to counsel and a hearing. If any of these steps were skipped — and they clearly fucking were — then the government violated its own laws and the Constitution.
The conversation should be with the American people. They are the audience. I'd be willing to bet a sizeable portion of those who voted Trump would be open to a more moderate (to both this, and what the left was doing before) vision of immigration policy and could be won over. Ultimately, the result of said conversation will come in the midterms and the next presidential election though. This issue has for now been "lost" for those in opposition to what is happening, it was front and centre in the election and has been arguably the animating issue of political engagement over the last few years (even longer in Europe). The revert to something more open again will mean winning that argument again.
What are you even trying to say here? People are overreacting to presidential over reach but at the same Trump was elected to act and not ask permission?
I thought I responded before but don’t see one now, so apologies if this doubles up. I guess my point is that this needs to be a real conviction with real policy proposals that appeal to voters with actual actions backing them up. The more it is used to just bash Trump and make it all about him, more I think people will tune out.
The problem has been brewing since the Bush administration. Congress has delegated their power to the executive branch and has continued doing so for years. The more it is used as a bludgeon against just Trump, the less seriously voters will take it. It has to be about fixing it beyond Trump and it has to be authentic. I think most of the Fifdom would probably approach it that way, but for reasons beyond our comprehension we are not the loudest and most important voices in the universe.
I don’t have a lot of faith in the people who do have that influence and if the plan is 2016-2020 Part II, they don’t have a chance in hell to do much to stop this nonsense in the White House.
Hey man seems like you are truly looking for some engagement and conversation on here but it is really hard to follow your writing. Lots of “this” and “it” with no clear indication of what you are talking about.
It seems like you are trying to say the people opposing Trump need to come up with an alternative policy plan. Sure, I agree. But in this very specific case, my take is that you don’t send people living here, no matter their legal status, their criminal history, their country of origin to a foreign prison without due process. No president or administration is above the law or exempt from checks and balances.
What a retarded set of statements you fucking partisan fascist hack dipshit.
a) No. The concern is clearly due to direct sending from the US to a foreign prison without due process. Like this is so fucking obvious you have to be retarded not to understand the outrage. And you’re clearly retarded so that checks out.
b) Fucking dipshit… if there’s a court ruling saying said person can’t be deported to a given country (much less a prison in that country)… they can’t be fucking deported to that country you fucking subhuman moron.
c) break it down then you dumb fuck. What’s the plan? What’s the fucking plan here? Moving a handful of (inept) Trump executive branch determined gang members to foreign prisons without due process? Is that the plan?
Honestly… say the fucking plan you fucking slimy fuck. What’s happening now is just for show bcuz the actual plan is insane you know that right?
So say it… what’s the actual big plan?! How will it be executed… go on… explain. Say it. Outline the plan you fucking simple jack, smooth brained, full retard, zero D chess supporting fuck.
d) next level dipshit deflection. Yes Trump is the animating factor… he’s the fucking President whose exec branch is doing this. That’s who is getting criticized you fucking worm. What constitutes a crisis is when a president ignores the courts or takes actions as to avoid any possible remedy (and/or pretending a possible remedy isn’t possible) via a court ruling (ie deporting persons to foreign prisons without due process and saying they can’t be brought back despite agreements that allow take backsies at US will). You fucking anti American scumbag.
Trump shows no signs of “doing what he was elected to do”… only signs of utter idiocy, extreme corruption, authoritarianism, and defiance of courts/rule of law. We’re done putting up with this bullshit. We’re going to bury him and this entire fucking maga retard movement. You dumb fascist fuck.
See you at the mid terms dumb shit. Luckily your retard in chief is an economic moron and has doomed himself unless he continues his Mussolini playbook and pulls it off. If so… will see you in the fucking streets fascist retard.
Re: Van Hollen visiting El Salvador. I’ll consider voting for the Democrats again when he and the rest of the squad show a drop of concern for the American citizen still imprisoned in Gaza. As a lifelong former Dem who didn’t vote for president, I find both sides equally disgraceful.
I'm a Maryland resident. It's embarrassing the senator went there with my tax dollars and I just wrote him an email saying basically the same thing about actual American hostages
Yeah no I’m not nice. But what’s much more not nice is saying absolutely retarded shit like the above. It deserves harsh ridicule not a bunch of “well actually”.
I am not disagreeing that America should not deport people without some sort of hearing, but why are you leaving out the fact that
“Kilmar Abrego Garcia entered the United States illegally sometime around 2011. After being arrested in 2019, he faced a series of immigration hearings. In April of that year, an immigration judge found that Garcia was a member of the MS-13 criminal gang; that finding was upheld by the Board of Immigration appeals. This finding made Garcia clearly deportable.
Six months later, a different immigration judge issued a “withholding” order—an order saying that there was one country to which Garcia could not be deported: El Salvador. That judge found that Garcia was legitimately fearful of being attacked by a different criminal gang and should not be sent back. That withholding order—which is country-specific and does not render Garcia non-deportable—was apparently not appealed and has never been reversed.” This was reported by Jed Rubenfeld of the free press.
It makes it seem like you are hiding the truth. Your point still holds, but the way you talk about it makes it sound as if the government just picked a random US citizen off the street because he had tattoos. That is not what happened. What happened is still a problem, but when you don’t actually explain what happened and makes it seem like you’re not worried about the truth.
That Rubenfeld article changed my perspective on the case considerably. I was disappointed that the boys did not dig into the weeds of the case, perhaps highlighting important details that Rubenfeld may have missed or glossed over. This undermines the claims that due process is not being followed, and, as you note, distracts from other concerns we might have regarding the deportations. One thing that Rubenfeld convinced me: the Trump admin is not provoking a Constitutional crisis, at least not in the sense of illegally defying Court orders. I don't like most of Trump's policies, and his brash mode of public communication is norm breaking to be sure, but I still don't think Trump is the kind of existential threat to American democracy that so many are keen to see. Or is traditional Presidential decorum an essential ingredient of our democracy?
Abrego Garcia was deported to El Salvador and handed directly to its prison system while his legal challenge was still pending in U.S. courts. His lawyer had even filed a motion to stay his removal and alerted ICE, but they deported him anyway — before the court had ruled.
This violates due process. Straight up.
Not that hard to get unless you’re intentionally trying not to get it.
To clarify, I agree that this case falls well short of the due process I expect and also of the much more liberal immigration policy I desire. Other recent deportation cases even more so. Like Rubenfeld, though, I find the hyperbole coming from so many Democrats to be unhelpful. Trump has proven to be a master of provoking his opposition to overshoot their target.
The Trump admin literally defied court orders specifically in the Garcia case. It’s not JUST lack of due process… it’s that the lack of due process is paired for blatant disregard of court orders. It’s a double whammy. Your hand waiving of this is wild and embarrassing.
And nah you don’t get to use examples of past Dem overshoots here. Yes there’s an entire online media apparatus of both Trump cult members and faux centrists/contrarians foaming at the mouth here trying to make the case that it’s not a big deal and Dems are over reacting. But none of that matches reality. Absolute brainrot in your part, on the part of The Free Press you cite and so many more.
I don't see how it undermines the claim that due process is not being followed. He was under a protective order preventing him from being deported to El Salvador. He was deported to El Salvador anyway. The proper course of action is to bring him back, go through the established procedures for rescinding the protective order, and then deport him to El Salvador again (if that's still what the administration wants to do). So long as the administration refuses to do this, they are denying him due process.
I reject the premise of Vance’s question. The American justice system is not designed to move fast and ask questions later. It’s designed to be deliberate. And that’s a good thing.
If that gets in the way of the Trump administration’s policy goal of deporting a million people per day, or whatever, tough shit. It’s better than the alternative.
Did Biden screw things up? Yeah, as did every president and Congress (which Vance was in) going back at least 30 years. Again, tough shit. Vance asked for this job. It’s up to him to find ways to solve the problem within the confines of the law and the Constitution, or to go through established procedures to change the law. He took an oath to that effect, after all.
He’s arguing for expediency over the rule of law. Hell. No.
I was pretty disappointed to see that they're considering Batya as another guest. Having people with differing views on is what makes The Fifth Colum awesome. But Batya isn't a particularly honest or intelligent representative of her views. She makes the discourse dumber wherever she appears.
Well, this thread sure is a dumpster fire. I am absolutely not going to play Comments Policeman, especially when the ire is directed at us -- you pay for that privilege, after all, and the feedback can be useful. But honestly, when everyone's screaming insults at one another, this becomes less and less of a place that I & other non-fans of vein-throbbing adjective-wars want to visit, which makes said feedback less likely to be received, and the resulting playing field to be even more dominated by the vein-throbbing minority. You are NOT going to win the Comments, or the Chat; this community is not and should not be defined by a common set of ideological beliefs & political affinities. I am asking that you figure out a way to communicate more decently with one another, and I am telling you that my/our record of banning exactly one commenter in three years is already one more than I care for.
For what it's worth, I have a buddy who is not a Trump supporter, but has been a fan of JD Vance and mass deportation, and he told me last night he would not vote for JD Vance because of his behavior on X-Twitter.
Also, I'd love for you guys to get Noah Rothman back on to discuss the Iranian and Qatari backed Hamas supporters. Having Douglas Murray on to talk about his new book and the Rogan spat would be cool, too.
It’s a day that ends in “y,” so I’m agreeing with basically nobody here.
On the deportations, the Legislative Branch ceded all questions to the Secretary of State (Executive Branch), AND the Administrative Law system (also Executive Branch).
The typical criminal and civil law protections do not apply in Admin Law, and there’s very limited Judicial Branch appellate jurisdiction.
If USDA decides your backyard goat cheese isn’t fit for sale, there’s very little you can do about it.
JDVP isn’t articulating that, which is disappointing for a boatload of reasons.
Brilliant strategy Sean… drive off foreign students with arbitrary exec branch decision making on deportation at any time. Say a single thing online the current admin doesn’t like… get deported. You’re the next Sundar Pichai but critical of Israel… off with you. Sounds like a recipe for the best and the brightest to not come to the US (the supposed free speech capital of the world).
I appreciate that it might seem harsh, but it’s how the laws are written.
You wanna come in and act foolishly, you have to come in via the normal practices before you can do that. You shortcut the line to get in on account of your abilities as _a student_. You’re not adding anything to the country yet, and you’re been given the opportunity to be here because of your academic potential.
Go to uscis.gov, and look at all the things you’re expected to do to stay absent the student status.
Again just a simple situation of whether you want some retarded admin like this one with their personal opinions on what ok political speech is for international students making that call and them drawing the line It’s not a law question it’s a whether we want to attract international student talent question. Images of international students being snatched off the streets is just a bad look. It just is and you of course know that.
Be honest Sean you’re willing to take the hit because you don’t want the competition from them because you’re a zero sum thinking dipshit. Or you’re a whacky pro Israel person. Or you’re just a shortsighted I don’t like left leaning folks who support Palestine. All of those reasons are retarded my dude
Of course, JD Vance has time to get into slap fights on Twitter. As far as I can tell, a VEEP’s main/only? function is to be so repugnant/incompetent that nobody would dream of removing the president from office (not just talking Vance here).
There are a lot of similarities between illegal immigration and illegal drug use. As long as there's demand, there's going to be supply. And like the War on Drugs, the War on Illegal Immigration will come with huge costs (both human and financial), it will be enforced with increasingly militarized tactics, and innocent people (including citizens) will get caught in the figurative and literal crossfire. And for all that, it won't solve the problem.
You can try tackling illegal immigration on the demand side, but that's going to require ruining the economy and turning America into an inhumane, authoritarian hell hole. That's too high a price to pay.
So what's the solution? More *legal* immigration. And just as ending the War on Drugs doesn't have to mean that there's a fentanyl distributor on every corner, ending the War on Illegal Immigration doesn't have to mean that we accept an open borders free-for-all. It just means meeting demand by giving enough people a streamlined, easy-to-navigate, relatively inexpensive way to work temporarily at wages that are mutually agreeable to them and their employers, and/or to permanently relocate and become citizens if that's what they want.
This would have several advantages. First, people who are just in search of a better life won't have to smuggle themselves across an inhospitable desert, so anyone who *is* still smuggling themselves across an inhospitable desert is going to be an actual criminal. That will let you focus border security on the actual security threats. Second, by bringing people into the legal workforce you can tax them to offset the cost of the government resources that they consume. Third, it would slow population decline and make it easier to deal with the problems it’s going to bring (which is important in a strategic competition with China, too!). Fourth, by giving people legal status you'll make it harder for employers and criminals to exploit them.
I realize there isn't political interest in this right now, but if you want an actual, durable solution, this is it.
People deny this, but a lot of the anti immigrant rhetoric comes from racists. High levels of immigration with a chance to become citizens will never be accepted by the majority.
The best you can do is offer to let them in to work but insist they return back home in a set period of time.
Matt, it was the Every Student Succeeds Act which put testing, curriculum framework, and instructional calendar in the hands of the state much more.
And...eh, instead of getting better, it got much weaker very quickly because the reliance became more and more on local (retarded) district and county leadership whose oversight was supposed to be conscientious about "local" backgrounds/knowledge for testing.
Instead, the testing options fell to two groups: publishing companies (eyebrows should raise here) and teacher-created "benchmark" tests (side-eye+whiskey). I cannot say legitimately which one was worse.
I feel a slight contrarian pull despite agreeing with much of what was said. I think we’ve reached a point where we will just be treading water until those taking a dissident position are willing to acknowledge the following:
(a) The public sees through the hysteria game. It’s over. It’s done. There would still be the exact same amount of outcry had the admin deported him to a country other than El Salvador, as they were legally allowed to do. If the legality was an issue, the wall to wall coverage would be about the barbarity of sending someone “to a country they’ve never visited”.
(b) Specify what proper deportation of long-term illegal residents should look like. Are all the people just arguing that an illegal immigrant should have been deported to another country? That doesn’t really align with the legal OR moral arguments that are being made.
(c) Endless “discussion” avoids action. We’ve been stuck here forever. No one is asking for anyone’s permission to have a conversation about immigration policies, they’ve been having those conversations. Washington has ignored the brewing problem like they do all of the other existential problems. This is the very phenomenon that made it possible for Trump to ascend in the first place, and it seems like A LOT of people still don’t get it.
(d) The cases in question are not nearly as clear legally OR morally as the vast majority of people are trying to make them out to be. A lot of the same people who now find themselves very concerned with the law and Constitution have historically gone out of their way to justify all sorts of unconstitutional and illegal behavior. People are never going to forget this. The best chance they have is to avoid turning it into a criticism of Trump and make it about the issue itself as a matter of principle. I am not sure they have the ability to do so, since I think Trump is the animating factor for them caring about most of what they talk about at all. As long as the deciding factor for what constitutes a “crisis” comes down to who’s sitting in the Oval Office, the problem will continue to get worse.
Trump understands exactly why he was elected: to ACT. It would really help if his critics understood it as well and built their argument around more than “we can have a conversation about these issues”. Thanks, but no one was asking for your permission in the first place. They’re done talking. I really wish political commentators would let themselves understand this and build their arguments accordingly.
I agree with your point. I would really like to see a counter argument that explains what actually happened and then says what actually should happen. Almost every counter argument I’ve seen has implied that US citizens were picked off the street because they have tattoos. I’m not even sure what to do with that. There is no place to start. It would be really nice if some of the very smart people out there would actually give a nuanced proposal. Something that explains the current reality (not just a political bashing argument) and gives us a real place that we can go from there. My brain would really appreciate that sort of argument.
What sources are you reading that are acting like US citizens have already been deported? Every story I’ve read from CNN, NPR, and The Atlantic have been pretty clear about what’s happened so far.
What should have happened? Setting aside my own policy preferences, the Trump administration should have went through established procedures to revoke Garcia’s protected status before deporting him to El Salvador, and they should give people being deported under the Alien Enemies Act the proper notice and opportunity to appeal their designation as alien enemies. In short, just follow the law.
I can’t remember where I originally read that. What I had in mind when I wrote this comment was this scary podcast. They talk about this man being deported for quite a while, and leave the impression that he was just an American citizen about his business. I would’ve liked to seen them explain the whole situation during this conversation. I don’t feel like these guys too often take shortcuts, but it seems like lately. They’ve been leaving out important details of the stories they discuss.
I think every story - and there are hundreds - that simply call Garcia a "Maryland man" is being deceptive that he was an illegal immigrant that was ruled a deportable alien by an immigration judge.
That's like calling a tourist a "Maryland man" just because they happened to be in Maryland, which no one would do even though the tourist has more of a legal right to be there than Garcia did.
Yes you agree with that point because you’re a fucking moron who pre admits you have no fucking clue what should happen (yet agree with the the rested Chris and his ultra dipshit’s points). Here’s what should have happened:
Before Garcia could legally be removed to El Salvador, ICE needed to prove he was not a U.S. citizen, get a valid removal order from an immigration judge, and give him full access to counsel and a hearing. If any of these steps were skipped — and they clearly fucking were — then the government violated its own laws and the Constitution.
That’s your answer you dumb fuck.
When you say "they clearly fucking were" you're aware that all of those steps actually did happen right?
How would one go about building a counter-argument to someone whose position is "we're done talking"?
The conversation should be with the American people. They are the audience. I'd be willing to bet a sizeable portion of those who voted Trump would be open to a more moderate (to both this, and what the left was doing before) vision of immigration policy and could be won over. Ultimately, the result of said conversation will come in the midterms and the next presidential election though. This issue has for now been "lost" for those in opposition to what is happening, it was front and centre in the election and has been arguably the animating issue of political engagement over the last few years (even longer in Europe). The revert to something more open again will mean winning that argument again.
What are you even trying to say here? People are overreacting to presidential over reach but at the same Trump was elected to act and not ask permission?
I thought I responded before but don’t see one now, so apologies if this doubles up. I guess my point is that this needs to be a real conviction with real policy proposals that appeal to voters with actual actions backing them up. The more it is used to just bash Trump and make it all about him, more I think people will tune out.
The problem has been brewing since the Bush administration. Congress has delegated their power to the executive branch and has continued doing so for years. The more it is used as a bludgeon against just Trump, the less seriously voters will take it. It has to be about fixing it beyond Trump and it has to be authentic. I think most of the Fifdom would probably approach it that way, but for reasons beyond our comprehension we are not the loudest and most important voices in the universe.
I don’t have a lot of faith in the people who do have that influence and if the plan is 2016-2020 Part II, they don’t have a chance in hell to do much to stop this nonsense in the White House.
Hey man seems like you are truly looking for some engagement and conversation on here but it is really hard to follow your writing. Lots of “this” and “it” with no clear indication of what you are talking about.
It seems like you are trying to say the people opposing Trump need to come up with an alternative policy plan. Sure, I agree. But in this very specific case, my take is that you don’t send people living here, no matter their legal status, their criminal history, their country of origin to a foreign prison without due process. No president or administration is above the law or exempt from checks and balances.
What a retarded set of statements you fucking partisan fascist hack dipshit.
a) No. The concern is clearly due to direct sending from the US to a foreign prison without due process. Like this is so fucking obvious you have to be retarded not to understand the outrage. And you’re clearly retarded so that checks out.
b) Fucking dipshit… if there’s a court ruling saying said person can’t be deported to a given country (much less a prison in that country)… they can’t be fucking deported to that country you fucking subhuman moron.
c) break it down then you dumb fuck. What’s the plan? What’s the fucking plan here? Moving a handful of (inept) Trump executive branch determined gang members to foreign prisons without due process? Is that the plan?
Honestly… say the fucking plan you fucking slimy fuck. What’s happening now is just for show bcuz the actual plan is insane you know that right?
So say it… what’s the actual big plan?! How will it be executed… go on… explain. Say it. Outline the plan you fucking simple jack, smooth brained, full retard, zero D chess supporting fuck.
d) next level dipshit deflection. Yes Trump is the animating factor… he’s the fucking President whose exec branch is doing this. That’s who is getting criticized you fucking worm. What constitutes a crisis is when a president ignores the courts or takes actions as to avoid any possible remedy (and/or pretending a possible remedy isn’t possible) via a court ruling (ie deporting persons to foreign prisons without due process and saying they can’t be brought back despite agreements that allow take backsies at US will). You fucking anti American scumbag.
Trump shows no signs of “doing what he was elected to do”… only signs of utter idiocy, extreme corruption, authoritarianism, and defiance of courts/rule of law. We’re done putting up with this bullshit. We’re going to bury him and this entire fucking maga retard movement. You dumb fascist fuck.
See you at the mid terms dumb shit. Luckily your retard in chief is an economic moron and has doomed himself unless he continues his Mussolini playbook and pulls it off. If so… will see you in the fucking streets fascist retard.
Seems like you should go to bed: it’s late, you’ve obviously had a rough day, and assuming you’re the age you’re acting, it’s way past your bedtime.
You have zero counter point Chris… exactly. You fucking fascist dipshit.
Sounds good JXJ. You enjoy being a miserable fuck.
Will always be hostile to fascist supporting fucks like yourself Chris. Doubly so for those with zero counters. Fuck you
Re: Van Hollen visiting El Salvador. I’ll consider voting for the Democrats again when he and the rest of the squad show a drop of concern for the American citizen still imprisoned in Gaza. As a lifelong former Dem who didn’t vote for president, I find both sides equally disgraceful.
I'm a Maryland resident. It's embarrassing the senator went there with my tax dollars and I just wrote him an email saying basically the same thing about actual American hostages
Yes because you’re against the rule of fucking law you fascist zero American principles fucking piece of shit.
You seem really nice! I've always heard insulting people helps them change their mind, but I'm not so sure now....
Yeah no I’m not nice. But what’s much more not nice is saying absolutely retarded shit like the above. It deserves harsh ridicule not a bunch of “well actually”.
I agree that saying absolutely retarded shit like the above deserves harsh ridicule. Be best, JXJ!
Looking forward to your vote you fucking “both sides” moronic dipshit:
Goalpost move in 3, 2, 1…
https://www.wbaltv.com/article/israel-gaza-war-hostages-killed-senator-chris-van-hollen/62036729
I am not disagreeing that America should not deport people without some sort of hearing, but why are you leaving out the fact that
“Kilmar Abrego Garcia entered the United States illegally sometime around 2011. After being arrested in 2019, he faced a series of immigration hearings. In April of that year, an immigration judge found that Garcia was a member of the MS-13 criminal gang; that finding was upheld by the Board of Immigration appeals. This finding made Garcia clearly deportable.
Six months later, a different immigration judge issued a “withholding” order—an order saying that there was one country to which Garcia could not be deported: El Salvador. That judge found that Garcia was legitimately fearful of being attacked by a different criminal gang and should not be sent back. That withholding order—which is country-specific and does not render Garcia non-deportable—was apparently not appealed and has never been reversed.” This was reported by Jed Rubenfeld of the free press.
It makes it seem like you are hiding the truth. Your point still holds, but the way you talk about it makes it sound as if the government just picked a random US citizen off the street because he had tattoos. That is not what happened. What happened is still a problem, but when you don’t actually explain what happened and makes it seem like you’re not worried about the truth.
That Rubenfeld article changed my perspective on the case considerably. I was disappointed that the boys did not dig into the weeds of the case, perhaps highlighting important details that Rubenfeld may have missed or glossed over. This undermines the claims that due process is not being followed, and, as you note, distracts from other concerns we might have regarding the deportations. One thing that Rubenfeld convinced me: the Trump admin is not provoking a Constitutional crisis, at least not in the sense of illegally defying Court orders. I don't like most of Trump's policies, and his brash mode of public communication is norm breaking to be sure, but I still don't think Trump is the kind of existential threat to American democracy that so many are keen to see. Or is traditional Presidential decorum an essential ingredient of our democracy?
Due process wasn’t followed.
Abrego Garcia was deported to El Salvador and handed directly to its prison system while his legal challenge was still pending in U.S. courts. His lawyer had even filed a motion to stay his removal and alerted ICE, but they deported him anyway — before the court had ruled.
This violates due process. Straight up.
Not that hard to get unless you’re intentionally trying not to get it.
To clarify, I agree that this case falls well short of the due process I expect and also of the much more liberal immigration policy I desire. Other recent deportation cases even more so. Like Rubenfeld, though, I find the hyperbole coming from so many Democrats to be unhelpful. Trump has proven to be a master of provoking his opposition to overshoot their target.
The Trump admin literally defied court orders specifically in the Garcia case. It’s not JUST lack of due process… it’s that the lack of due process is paired for blatant disregard of court orders. It’s a double whammy. Your hand waiving of this is wild and embarrassing.
And nah you don’t get to use examples of past Dem overshoots here. Yes there’s an entire online media apparatus of both Trump cult members and faux centrists/contrarians foaming at the mouth here trying to make the case that it’s not a big deal and Dems are over reacting. But none of that matches reality. Absolute brainrot in your part, on the part of The Free Press you cite and so many more.
I don't see how it undermines the claim that due process is not being followed. He was under a protective order preventing him from being deported to El Salvador. He was deported to El Salvador anyway. The proper course of action is to bring him back, go through the established procedures for rescinding the protective order, and then deport him to El Salvador again (if that's still what the administration wants to do). So long as the administration refuses to do this, they are denying him due process.
I reject the premise of Vance’s question. The American justice system is not designed to move fast and ask questions later. It’s designed to be deliberate. And that’s a good thing.
If that gets in the way of the Trump administration’s policy goal of deporting a million people per day, or whatever, tough shit. It’s better than the alternative.
Did Biden screw things up? Yeah, as did every president and Congress (which Vance was in) going back at least 30 years. Again, tough shit. Vance asked for this job. It’s up to him to find ways to solve the problem within the confines of the law and the Constitution, or to go through established procedures to change the law. He took an oath to that effect, after all.
He’s arguing for expediency over the rule of law. Hell. No.
The whole basis of our judicial system, deliberation... better to let 10 guilty man Escape than one innocent suffer
Thank you, Matt, for telling Jesse to go fuck himself in the face.
I felt a surge of American pride right there (and I like Jesse)
Same! (It was a “go fuck yourself in the face” of affection.)
I was pretty disappointed to see that they're considering Batya as another guest. Having people with differing views on is what makes The Fifth Colum awesome. But Batya isn't a particularly honest or intelligent representative of her views. She makes the discourse dumber wherever she appears.
Yes, but if we are lucky, people who like Batya will listen to the episode of the 5th and realize that the boys are correct instead of her.
"Jessie"
Poor dude
Well, this thread sure is a dumpster fire. I am absolutely not going to play Comments Policeman, especially when the ire is directed at us -- you pay for that privilege, after all, and the feedback can be useful. But honestly, when everyone's screaming insults at one another, this becomes less and less of a place that I & other non-fans of vein-throbbing adjective-wars want to visit, which makes said feedback less likely to be received, and the resulting playing field to be even more dominated by the vein-throbbing minority. You are NOT going to win the Comments, or the Chat; this community is not and should not be defined by a common set of ideological beliefs & political affinities. I am asking that you figure out a way to communicate more decently with one another, and I am telling you that my/our record of banning exactly one commenter in three years is already one more than I care for.
For what it's worth, I have a buddy who is not a Trump supporter, but has been a fan of JD Vance and mass deportation, and he told me last night he would not vote for JD Vance because of his behavior on X-Twitter.
Also, I'd love for you guys to get Noah Rothman back on to discuss the Iranian and Qatari backed Hamas supporters. Having Douglas Murray on to talk about his new book and the Rogan spat would be cool, too.
Somebody on Reddit nailed it when they called Vance a "male Karen."
Wait until your bud sees what mass deportation looks like in practice. Dude is going to be voting for Marianne Williamson by 2028 if that happens lmao
Doubtful. He'd probably be happy if the mass deportation actually happened. But he'd also probably do what he did in the last election: stay home.
It’s a day that ends in “y,” so I’m agreeing with basically nobody here.
On the deportations, the Legislative Branch ceded all questions to the Secretary of State (Executive Branch), AND the Administrative Law system (also Executive Branch).
The typical criminal and civil law protections do not apply in Admin Law, and there’s very limited Judicial Branch appellate jurisdiction.
If USDA decides your backyard goat cheese isn’t fit for sale, there’s very little you can do about it.
JDVP isn’t articulating that, which is disappointing for a boatload of reasons.
The other part of that is…Congress granted the Executive Branch a _ton_ of flexibility when it comes to doing things in an emergency.
The question is whether the Executive Branch has that authority is a real question.
Disagree on the student visas, too.
You’re a guest. STFU, and finish your studies.
I like coffee and cigarettes; if I was a student at BYU, and was dismissed for having those, I get deported.
Deal with it.
Brilliant strategy Sean… drive off foreign students with arbitrary exec branch decision making on deportation at any time. Say a single thing online the current admin doesn’t like… get deported. You’re the next Sundar Pichai but critical of Israel… off with you. Sounds like a recipe for the best and the brightest to not come to the US (the supposed free speech capital of the world).
Embarrassing you illiberal fuck
I appreciate that it might seem harsh, but it’s how the laws are written.
You wanna come in and act foolishly, you have to come in via the normal practices before you can do that. You shortcut the line to get in on account of your abilities as _a student_. You’re not adding anything to the country yet, and you’re been given the opportunity to be here because of your academic potential.
Go to uscis.gov, and look at all the things you’re expected to do to stay absent the student status.
https://www.uscis.gov/laws-and-policy
Not being a douchenozzle on campus is *easy* in comparison.
Again just a simple situation of whether you want some retarded admin like this one with their personal opinions on what ok political speech is for international students making that call and them drawing the line It’s not a law question it’s a whether we want to attract international student talent question. Images of international students being snatched off the streets is just a bad look. It just is and you of course know that.
Be honest Sean you’re willing to take the hit because you don’t want the competition from them because you’re a zero sum thinking dipshit. Or you’re a whacky pro Israel person. Or you’re just a shortsighted I don’t like left leaning folks who support Palestine. All of those reasons are retarded my dude
Or I spent part of my childhood living in a foreign country; could be.
Don’t be the “Ugly American.”
Of course, JD Vance has time to get into slap fights on Twitter. As far as I can tell, a VEEP’s main/only? function is to be so repugnant/incompetent that nobody would dream of removing the president from office (not just talking Vance here).
Selina Meyer would resent that
He is a human, repugnant to use your word, permanent filibuster.
did jessie present his plan to combat illegal immigration?
It’s spelled “Bussy Singal” 😤
Fifth Column transition to Dispatch / Pod Saves America podcast is complete. See you on the other side boys.
Bye George keep up the fascism support dipshit
There are a lot of similarities between illegal immigration and illegal drug use. As long as there's demand, there's going to be supply. And like the War on Drugs, the War on Illegal Immigration will come with huge costs (both human and financial), it will be enforced with increasingly militarized tactics, and innocent people (including citizens) will get caught in the figurative and literal crossfire. And for all that, it won't solve the problem.
You can try tackling illegal immigration on the demand side, but that's going to require ruining the economy and turning America into an inhumane, authoritarian hell hole. That's too high a price to pay.
So what's the solution? More *legal* immigration. And just as ending the War on Drugs doesn't have to mean that there's a fentanyl distributor on every corner, ending the War on Illegal Immigration doesn't have to mean that we accept an open borders free-for-all. It just means meeting demand by giving enough people a streamlined, easy-to-navigate, relatively inexpensive way to work temporarily at wages that are mutually agreeable to them and their employers, and/or to permanently relocate and become citizens if that's what they want.
This would have several advantages. First, people who are just in search of a better life won't have to smuggle themselves across an inhospitable desert, so anyone who *is* still smuggling themselves across an inhospitable desert is going to be an actual criminal. That will let you focus border security on the actual security threats. Second, by bringing people into the legal workforce you can tax them to offset the cost of the government resources that they consume. Third, it would slow population decline and make it easier to deal with the problems it’s going to bring (which is important in a strategic competition with China, too!). Fourth, by giving people legal status you'll make it harder for employers and criminals to exploit them.
I realize there isn't political interest in this right now, but if you want an actual, durable solution, this is it.
People deny this, but a lot of the anti immigrant rhetoric comes from racists. High levels of immigration with a chance to become citizens will never be accepted by the majority.
The best you can do is offer to let them in to work but insist they return back home in a set period of time.
Matt, it was the Every Student Succeeds Act which put testing, curriculum framework, and instructional calendar in the hands of the state much more.
And...eh, instead of getting better, it got much weaker very quickly because the reliance became more and more on local (retarded) district and county leadership whose oversight was supposed to be conscientious about "local" backgrounds/knowledge for testing.
Instead, the testing options fell to two groups: publishing companies (eyebrows should raise here) and teacher-created "benchmark" tests (side-eye+whiskey). I cannot say legitimately which one was worse.