6
0

Maryland Man


 invite response                  
2025 Apr 14, 2:16pm   5,606 views  406 comments

by PanicanDemoralizer   ➕follow (10)   ignore (3)  

Media Bias Continues


El Salvador won’t return wrongly deported Maryland man
https://x.com/politico/status/1911819797651747093

Natch, he's an illegal alien with no residency, citizenship, or visa.

Bukele is keeping him in El Salvador, I heard he's actually in jail on El Salvadorian charges.

« First        Comments 119 - 158 of 406       Last »     Search these comments

119   PeopleUnited   2025 Apr 20, 4:25pm  

stereotomy says


Where were you complaining about the lack of due process for the J6'rs for the PAST 4 YEARS? You pick and choose when to cry about civil liberties.


This^^^

Some here are clearly not arguing in good faith. Just parroting Rachel Maddox and MSDNC’s Marxist obstructionist talking points. If the liberals have their way they might as well live in El Salvador, the place this guy wanted to escape from, or Cuba or better yet China which is the end game for the Marxist ideology.
120   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 4:29pm  

PeopleUnited says

A man sneaks on to a Private golf course. He plays 14 holes and then he gets caught by security. Security gives him a ride home.

He had no right to be there, so he has no right to appeal to the board. He could have asked the board for a guest membership BEFORE he came onto the course, but he didn’t.

That’s pretty much exactly what happened here.

Excellent allegory.
121   Onvacation   2025 Apr 20, 4:43pm  

DeficitHawk says

So, tell me, should this guy get due process or not?

He got his due process. The judge said he had to go home.

What does due process mean to you?
122   Onvacation   2025 Apr 20, 4:55pm  

I once plead not guilty to a camera right turn violation. I spent an hour of the courts time arguing why I should not be fined for safely rolling through a red light on a right hand turn on to the highway when no one was around to see it but a revenue generating camera.

After I had my say, the judge asked me, "Do you have anything else to say?"

I replied, "No."

He slammed down his gavel and pronounced, "GUILTY!, That took a lot longer than it should have!"

I got my due process and the court got my money. Technically, and legally, I broke the law.

The "Maryland Man" from El Salvador had his time in court and now he is back home where he should be.
123   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 6:37pm  

Onvacation says


He got his due process. The judge said he had to go home.

What judge said this?

What does due process mean? it just means the right to bring your facts/case before a judge and have your case be heard and decided on by a judge rather than the person who accused/arrested you. Its really basic. For this guy, it would just mean having his immigration and refugee status facts voiced before a judge, and a decision by the judge whether to deport or not. IF the judge orders deportation after that hearing, that satisfies my view of due process, and deportation can proceed.
124   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 6:47pm  

Onvacation says


I got my due process and the court got my money. Technically, and legally, I broke the law.

Yup. I mean, that is the process. You get your say, the judge hears it, considers the law and decides. The consequences follow based on the judges order. In some circumstances an appeal to a higher court is possible, but in simple cases the higher court wont accept the appeal.

This guy didn't get this. The judge ordered him NOT to be deported, and he was deported anyway.
125   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 6:49pm  

PeopleUnited says

stereotomy says

Where were you complaining about the lack of due process for the J6'rs for the PAST 4 YEARS? You pick and choose when to cry about civil liberties.

This^^^


I was not too worried that the patnet crowd would have trouble finding voices to advocate for the J6'ers... But even still, I was NOT here advocating to take away the bill of rights protections from the J6'ers.
126   Ceffer   2025 Apr 20, 7:43pm  

Boy, I'd like to see this guy's Epstein Island blackmail tapes. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, especially in a so called elected representative (or sociopathic Soros toilet installation).

https://t.me/SGTnewsNetwork/90737
127   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 7:44pm  

DeficitHawk says


This guy didn't get this. The judge ordered him NOT to be deported, and he was deported anyway.

Too expensive. He's not a citizen, not an overstay, never had any kind of authorization.

Just like immigration can refuse and send packing back a person without a passport at the airport, with no judge, ICE can just deport people with no documentation.

He can appeal from El Salvador; Zoom is a thing.
128   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 7:50pm  

Some other priorities:

* Not allowing investor visas in the same family without a 14-year gap. Uncle Raj can not buy the hotel, sell it to cousin Vijay 7 years later, and then Vijay gets 7 years of preferred treatment and a visa.

* Students Visa holders cannot bring a spouse or family member. Colleges and Universities are required to
A) Colleges must sponsor ALL students (they must have an acceptance letter and ON-CAMPUS only housing guarantee)
B) give quarterly updates with current, physically verified (The student appeared at the school office or visited in his dormitory) location and status.
C) Bachelor students may not stay more than 77 months. Masters 25 months. PhDs 49 months.
D) Upon issuance of a degree, there are 30 days to leave the USA.
E) Students MUST stay in University housing, no private off-campus housing, and as university property, their rooms are subject to inspection on demand by ICE as a condition of the visa.
F) Student Visa holders and the University must report ALL political activities to the FBI. This includes any membership in "Students Against Whiteness" or "RU hating Colonialism?" or "UMinn Mankato Democratic Socialists"

* H1Bs may only work in the field for which the H1B was issued
A) H1Bs must be issued by the final employer, not a temp or work agency. The H1B must work directly on the employer's premises for the employer, paid by the employer who sponsored the visa, with no subcontracting allowed (FU Tata!).
B) H1Bs may only work in the BLS-listed industry for which they originally were hired for. That means no working for Uncle Vijay's Motel if Raj is let go from Boeing.
C) H1Bs may not bring spouses, children, immediate or extended family members.
D) No H1B may be renewed for over 2 years.
129   Fortwaye   2025 Apr 20, 7:56pm  

argued with a man in parking lot over it. he was a democrat strongly convinced Trump is deporting US citizens
130   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 8:01pm  

DeficitHawk says


Yup. I mean, that is the process. You get your say, the judge hears it, considers the law and decides. The consequences follow based on the judges order. In some circumstances an appeal to a higher court is possible, but in simple cases the higher court wont accept the appeal.

There is no due process for those without any documentation:


entered the U.S. without a valid entry document (such as a visa or border crosser card) or travel document (such as a passport).

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/when-expedited-removal-allows-deportation-without-hearing.html

So "Maryland Man" (sic) can simply be deported. Congress and Executive agree; the Judiciary is not - as much propaganda has pushed - the superior branch, but merely a co-equal one.

Obviously this is the case as the BP and Airport Immigration and Customs couldn't turn away aliens without documents.
131   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 8:05pm  

AmericanKulak says


Just like immigration can refuse and send packing back a person without a passport at the airport, with no judge, ICE can just deport people with no documentation.

I agree with something thing you said... ICE CAN turn away someone who is arriving/entering without due process. That HAS been decided in case law, and there is immigration reform law that expedites removal for arriving immigrants and limits due process for arriving immigrants. But they can NOT expel someone who has been here for a long time without due process... that is also established in case law. And they can also not deport someone in violation of a court order. This guy had been here many years, and had a court order against deportation. So what ICE did was NOT legal.

AmericanKulak says


He can appeal from El Salvador; Zoom is a thing.

In principle, I agree that remote methods, and enabling appeals from outside the country after deportation rather than delaying deportation are a reasonable way to maintain due process while expediting the process. BUT in this case, he was put in prison at the request of our government in a country who will not send him back even if a court orders it (which was also probably requested by our administration.) So how can he appeal if there is no way he can get back should his appeal succeed? He can NOT appeal in this case.

Remote appeals after deportation instead of delayed deportation is absolutely a reasonable way to manage expedited removal process.... but such an opportunity is denied to this person in this case. (on purpose by our administration).

As far as the rest of your list... thats all a matter of immigration laws. Congress can write whatever laws they want on these things.. thats kind of besides the point of this thread.. But the administration needs to comply with the laws we have, and can not circumvent the constitution while enforcing them.
132   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 8:07pm  

DeficitHawk says


I agree with something thing you said... ICE CAN turn away someone who is arriving/entering without due process. That HAS been decided in case law, and there is immigration reform law that expedites removal for arriving immigrants and limits due process for arriving immigrants. But they can NOT expel someone who has been here for a long time without due process... that is also established in case law. And they can also not deport someone in violation of a court order. This guy had been here many years, and had a court order against deportation. So what ICE did was NOT legal.

This is nowhere stated.

Additionally, as an MS13 member, the Enemy Alien Act (as amended) applies.

Again, due process can be given from El Salvador via Zoom.
133   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 8:09pm  

We also need a "No hearing or inspection, no process" law explicitly passed by Congress.

If you didn't need a judge or ANY federal officer to clear you, you don't need a judge to boot you.

Otherwise it unfairly privileges pro-immigration and illegals. We have millions to deport.

As a last resort, Congress can simply create 10,000 immigration judges appointed by Trump, which would be great. They would shift boundaries regularly to confound the ACLU and Immigrant Justice and the Jesuits

A deportation Rocket Docket, this time used against the top 1% that wants cheap labor uber alles.
134   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 8:14pm  

Finally, Trump's IRS needs to carefully examine Jesuit Refugee Service, LARS, Catholic Charities, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, etc. and make sure all their payments are in keeping with every law. Additionally, consider directing them as political activist groups not subject to tax exempt status.

And consider an illegal employer whistleblower act that gives a green card to those who report their employers.
135   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 8:28pm  

OH, and make Charities mandatory reporters for illegals to be tax exempt.
136   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 9:07pm  

AmericanKulak says

This is nowhere stated.

What do you mean? I outlined the case law for this in my comments above... "It is true that aliens who have once passed through our
gates, even illegally, may be expelled only after proceedings conforming to traditional standards of fairness-encompassed in due process of law." The Japanese Immigrant Case, 189 U. S. 86, 100-101 (1903); Wong Yang Sung v. McGrath, 339 U. S. 33, 49-50 (1950); Kwong Hai Chew v. Colding, 344 U. S. 590, 598 (1953).

And the cases that restrict due process for arriving immigrants "on the threshold of initial entry".... Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel. Mezei, 345 U.S. 206, 212 (1953) and the 1996 immigration reform law that provides for expedited removal of arriving immigrants (which can also included recently arrived in some cases up to 2 years per supreme court depending on details). Everything i am saying is stated in law and supreme court cases.

Anyway, what's going on now is Trump is using a wartime alien enemies act in peace time. The last time we used this law was to intern Japanese people in WW2. I hope the supreme court puts an end to this. (They have, for now... time will tell how that turns out).
137   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 9:10pm  

AmericanKulak says

We also need a "No hearing or inspection, no process" law explicitly passed by Congress

You cant make laws that violate the constitution though. Supreme court will (and should) invalidate them.

We need to make laws that maintain due process while expediting procedures. Supreme court HAS given guidance that due process is restricted for arriving immigrants, so less procedures are needed for them. But immigrants who have been here, they need due process and congress can not override that with a law.
138   WookieMan   2025 Apr 20, 9:17pm  

DeficitHawk says

Anyway, what's going on now is Trump is using a wartime alien enemies act in peace time.

What is peaceful about illegally entering a country as part of a gang? He's using an act at his disposal to get the guy out of here.

Regardless of all the back and forth, you clearly support illegal immigration. I don't. There are plenty of prosperous countries on the planet that might let you in. I have kids. I'm not okay with it. I even wish legal immigration was banned and we stopped the work visas.

I don't care about refugees either. You didn't do anything in your own country. You live with sitting on your ass and doing nothing about it. Running isn't the solution because you'll end up a burden on our country. It's a lose lose proposition for Americans.
139   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 9:20pm  

WookieMan says

you clearly support illegal immigration. I don't


I dont support illegal immigration. I do support maintaining due process as we deal with it. That's our difference. You are taking 'the ends justify the means, we can disregard the constitution and our laws to deal with a problem" approach. I dont think thats OK>
140   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 9:23pm  

WookieMan says


I even wish legal immigration was banned

I totally disagree with you on this. I think we should have legal immigration. (and I think the lack of legal pathways is contributing to the problem of illegal immigration)

Edit: Actually, I really dont understand your position on Legal immigration, especially in the context of Trump's OTHER major controversy... attempting to re-industrialize USA and do manufacturing here by imposing tariffs on imports. How can we hope to re-industrialize and grow manufacturing without a labor force to do it? I guess I am digressing, this is a separate topic from the title of this thread.
141   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 9:26pm  

DeficitHawk says


Anyway, what's going on now is Trump is using a wartime alien enemies act in peace time.


Well, there's good arguments that gang members and law breakers - which Maryland man obviously was, being covered in MS13 tats, and former membership in an enemy or seditious or criminal group is disqualifying (as SCOTUS determined in Harisiades 1952) .

Let's see what the Courts say when there are actual hearings. Until then they can have a date scheduled by Zoom from El Salvador or Honduras.
142   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 9:34pm  

DeficitHawk says


I think we should have legal immigration.

At about 200k a year, which is mighty generous, and diversified by law - that once one country of origin gets to be more than 5% of the total 200k, further migration from that country ends for the year. We have a housing affordability and shitty salary problem. Let's remember in the Golden 50s and 60s immigration was minimal compared to today. America First.

But the hypermassive extreme immigration is going to stop, illegal AND legal. The last time we had immigration this massive in the 1920s, GDP was growing at 8% a year and a new tool and die plant opening on every block. That's not the case today.
143   WookieMan   2025 Apr 20, 9:48pm  

DeficitHawk says

WookieMan says
I even wish legal immigration was banned

I totally disagree with you on this. I think we should have legal immigration. (and I think the lack of legal pathways is contributing to the problem of illegal immigration)

Totally disagree. Cut immigration off and promote family development nationally. The melting pot already happened. We need to move on. Blacks and whites procreate. Different religions procreate, hell Ivanka and Jared.

We don't need more people. We need to keep the demographics stable and promote family growth. Men being fathers. Get the black community back on its feet without handouts. We don't need any immigrants.

Basically I give no shits about an illegal immigrant from El Salvador. Goodbye. We don't need people that got here the wrong way. Law be damned at this point.
144   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 9:48pm  

AmericanKulak says

Let's see what the Courts say when there are actual hearings.

Exactly this!

I have no problem excluding people based on association with criminal gangs, or crimes committed while in USA or crimes committed in their country of origin. I WANT those people excluded, and if this guy is one of them, I WANT him excluded too. I just want there to be a hearing before sending people to the gulags.
145   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 9:50pm  

DeficitHawk says


There was no lack of due process for them. They got trials. You just don't like the result.

Yeah, we're not falling for that.

This time it's us with the biased courts and the zoom calls from overseas country of origin for the deportation hearing.

Let the Supreme Court deploy it's divisions.
146   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 9:50pm  

DeficitHawk says


I have no problem excluding people based on association with criminal gangs, or crimes committed while in USA or crimes committed in their country of origin. I WANT those people excluded, and if this guy is one of them, I WANT him excluded too. I just want there to be a hearing before sending people to the gulags.


Yep, via Zoom from Honduras or El Salvador. Deportation first, hearing later.

I KNOW that Soros and the pro-immigration lobby wants hearings here so they can then start lawfare with WHICH courts hear it, magically schedule them for the most pro-immigration Obama appointees, that it took too long so their due process was violated (despite them hiding) so they have to stay arguments, etc.

The Rule of Law can blow me, it's been so abused the past 4 years. Now it's my turn to give my enemies and opposition the full weight of the law, with only consideration and leeway for my allies. Just like they did.

The only way they will learn is to suffer as much. No more "Good Republicans doing principle, while the Left goes all out with as much as they can get away with, but when the Republicans come back, it's principles and rule of law again."
147   Karloff   2025 Apr 20, 9:53pm  

So Republicans need to follow the Democrats' interpretations of the law, but Democrats don't need to follow clear written letter of the law or SCOTUS rulings. Got it.

After seeing decades of lawlessness, selective/vindictive prosecution, rampant corruption, and outright murder and framing of political enemies, I simply don't care about "law" anymore, because it no longer matters. I care about what's right and what's wrong. Finally something right was done, and this guy got a well deserved one-way ticket to where he belongs.

You want to care about the law play holier than thou? You're about 30 years too late. Should've fixed this problem long ago instead of ignoring it because it suited your politics at the time. It's a game where one side gets to cheat constantly while the other is expected to follow every rule to the letter. That ends in guaranteed loss if you allow that. Enough is enough.
148   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 9:53pm  

AmericanKulak says

Let the Supreme Court deploy it's divisions.

Oh come on now. Do you really want to encourage us to live in a country where checks and balances are abandoned? Courts disregarded? Laws and constitutions ignored? I can understand rhetoric... but do you really want this to be the country you live in? I dont want that.
149   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 9:55pm  

DeficitHawk says


Oh come on now. Do you really want to encourage us to live in a country where checks and balances are abandoned? Courts disregarded? Laws and constitutions ignored? I can understand rhetoric... but do you really want this to be the country you live in? I dont want that.

Already happened. People in solitary for a year for trespassing before trial, and the same cheerleaders for it were crying that a 34-year old 17-year student visa holder who never earned a single degree but worked for a foreign political group was finally deported.

Slap 'em back so they learn.

No more principles for me, pushing boundaries for them. I'm done. I want to win, not be principled, it's gotten me nowhere.

I need results, not vague promises.

Fuck the rule of law. I want revenge and victory.

I will, however, be magnanimous to uphold the rule of law if they surrender unconditionally. They broke the trust, it's up to them, where they have the power to show - not talk - about fixing it. Until then the maximum weight of government on them, and the best treatment for me and my allies.
150   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 9:58pm  

Well, I dont agree. I dont want to abandon checks and balances. I dont want the courts ignored. I dont want the constitution abandoned. I dont want the country you are describing. Im not going to encourage it, and Im going to advocate against it.
151   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 9:59pm  

DeficitHawk says


Well, I dont agree. I dont want to abandon checks and balances. I dont want the courts ignored. I dont want the constitution abandoned. I dont want the country you are describing. Im not going to encourage it, and Im going to advocate against it.

Already was.

I'm not fighting with on hand tied while they have both hands free and kick below the belt and the ref ignores it or allows it only in their case.

I want to beat them with a tire iron and the judge ignore it, then maybe after they are beaten to a pulp and no longer an opponent, we'll restore the rule of law.
152   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 9:59pm  

AmericanKulak says

Fuck the rule of law. I want revenge and victory.

Its going to be hard for you and I to see eye to eye.
153   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 10:00pm  

DeficitHawk says


Its going to be hard for you and I to see eye to eye.

Get them to surrender unconditionally and I won't beat them with a tire iron as they deserve.

I won't be talked back into stupid principles they themselves don't believe in and violate every chance they get.

(Edit: And the ref ignores)
154   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 10:02pm  

AmericanKulak says

DeficitHawk says



Its going to be hard for you and I to see eye to eye.

Get them to surrender unconditionally and I won't beat them with a tire iron as they deserve.

I won't be talked back into stupid principles they themselves don't believe in and violate every chance they get.

Who is "they"? do you mean me? People who believe in rule of law and the constitution?
155   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 10:03pm  

DeficitHawk says


Who is "they"? do you mean me? People who believe in rule of law and the constitution?

Leftists don't believe in the Constitution.

They got a magic 20M votes just oh so coincidentially when we had mail-in voting, but lost handsomely like before when it was no longer in operation.

Only a fool thinks that a coincidence.
156   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 10:04pm  

AmericanKulak says

Leftists don't believe in the Constitution.

Try me.
157   PanicanDemoralizer   2025 Apr 20, 10:05pm  

DeficitHawk says

Try me.

I searched your posts for J6ers, and found nothing prior to this recent conversation.
158   DeficitHawk   2025 Apr 20, 10:09pm  

AmericanKulak says

DeficitHawk says


Try me.

I searched your posts for J6ers, and found nothing prior to this recent conversation.

I'm sure I made some comments that J6 was a serious incident and people had committed violence and deserved sentencing consistent with their actions. I did not say they should be deprived of their rights under the constitution, I think they were entitled due process while being tried for their crimes.

« First        Comments 119 - 158 of 406       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   users   suggestions   gaiste