- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
LSUFAITHFUL2
| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 151 |
| Registered on: | 2/18/2024 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Tennessee police in 2022 busted Maryland thug with trafficking 7 women
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/17/25 at 1:14 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
Thanks for the thoughtful reply and all the citations. As to the AEA's application to Abrego Garcia's case, we will never know because the government didn't deport him on those grounds.
I think that’s where the confusion lies. The administration did deport him under the AEA. He was already adjudicated as MS13 by two immigration decisions. While he had an order not to be sent to El Salvador…that goes out the window after the AEA order designating MS13 an enemy of the state.
You say that the government didn’t deport him on those grounds. I think the government has come out disputing that and fired the attorney that didn’t advance those arguments. The fired attorney would have drafted the affidavit.
This whole rigamarole is for nothing. Like I said, even if El Salvador sent him back, we would turn around and send him back and advance the actual reason he was deported and why the 2019 order was legally ignored…because of the AEA.
This has literally been some sort of gotcha game that will amount to nothing.
I also think the Dems are falling into a very dangerous trap here. All this chicken little sky is falling nonsense reveals their willingness to defend the worst of the illegals here. I mean is this the hill to die on for dems? This is why they didn’t win the election. They keep picking fights that the majority of Americans do not support.
3
re: Tennessee police in 2022 busted Maryland thug with trafficking 7 women
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/17/25 at 9:35 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
How can this hold considering he claimed he feared retribution from a rival gang (supposedly called the 18th Street Gang) which NO LONGER EXISTS! How can one be fearful of something that is gone?
Ask the Supreme Court because that's what they ruled
SFP taking liberties with reality again. The US Supreme Ct was not reviewing the question of whether the hold should still exist now that the rival gang no longer exists. The Supreme Court did not consider whether the AEA makes the hold order no longer relevant, since under the AEA anyone that isn’t a naturalized citizen can be deported if subject to the order.
The Supreme Court was reviewing exclusively the question of whether the trial judge could order the administration to go get this guy from El Salvador, which they ruled 9-0 could not occur. When evaluating the question, the court took as true that he was deported in violation of the hold order because the now fired lawyer for the government didn’t challenge that fact.
So, no, the USSC has not decided whether this guys hold order should continue to exist since the rival gang doesn’t exist. It also didn’t hold that this guy can’t be deported under the AEA. The only thing before the court and decided is that the trial judge can’t order the administration to go get him and return him.
re: Tennessee police in 2022 busted Maryland thug with trafficking 7 women
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/17/25 at 9:22 am to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
Thanks. That's at least a legal argument. I don't think it would have held up even if presented to the Supreme Court. I don't think invocation of the Alien Enemies Act would have applied retroactively to dissolve the pre-existing grant of protection from removal to El Salvador.
Well you would be wrong, everyone subject to the executive order is subject to deportation under the AEA unless they are naturalized citizens. You can have a green card, visa, etc. and be subject to deportation under the AEA.
quote:
all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies.
Text of the AEA. LINK
re: Tennessee police in 2022 busted Maryland thug with trafficking 7 women
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/17/25 at 8:26 am to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
Are you saying that the immigration judge's hold order prohibiting Abrego Garcia’s deportation to El Salvador (see first item in attached ICE Field Director's affidavit) dissolved AUTOMATICALLY? I'm just not aware of any practice in law or administrative procedure where that could be true...but I'm willing to learn.
It’s not that the rival gang doesn’t exist anymore that dissolves the hold automatically, it’s the fact that MS-13 is now subject to the Alien Enemies Act per Trump executive order. Under that all immigration asylums, procedures, are gone.
You all keep saying the USSC ruled that his deportation was in error. They didn’t rule that because they didn’t have to. The attorney for the government advanced this position and was terminated for it. He was apparently unwilling to raise the issue that the hold was dissolved once Trump issues the order under the AEA.
If El Salvador brought himback, he would immediately be returned and the gov would site the AEA at the basis for the hold order no longer existing, as should have been argued in the first place. If El Salvador returns him, the only way to challenge his deportation under the AEA is through a habeus petition in TX (as recently ruled by the USS). Which means this dude is going straight back to El Salvador.
re: It seems Mamoud khalil will likely win his immigration court hearing.
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/12/25 at 9:46 am to Pandy Fackler
re: It seems Mamoud khalil will likely win his immigration court hearing.
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/12/25 at 9:38 am to Pandy Fackler
quote:
I'll take it a step further. If there was any evidence at all that he's supported Hamas, deport him.That violates the terms of his green card, but the fact of the matter is there isn't, or if there is, it hasn't been presented.
Kahlil was the lead negotiator for CUAD. CUAD supports violence, celebrated Oct. 7 and calls for the eradication of the west.
LINK
You should also read this suit. Filed by Oct hostages and their family.
LINK
The administration hasn’t presented this evidence to deport him, because they don’t have to. The law gives SOS the discretion to revoke a green card if it’s against the US’s foreign policy interests.
re: It seems Mamoud khalil will likely win his immigration court hearing.
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/12/25 at 9:15 am to nealnan8
quote:
Guess what? Being Pro-Palestinian and Antisemitic is not a crime and has nothing to do with being Anti-Amercian.
Do you support deportation of folks that are Anti-American? That call for the eradication of Western Civilization?
Because that’s what Khalil stands for.
re: Mahmoud KHalil- He gone
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/12/25 at 8:51 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:
Oh no. Protesting! So scary.
Khalil was negotiating on behalf of the people that took over Hamilton Hall, blocked Jewish students from attending class, spewed hate speech, etc.
Imagine if white people were doing this and preventing African Americans from feeling safe to go to school.
Khalil was threatening the administration that they must give in to their demands or blocking access to classrooms, occupying administrative offices, harassing other students, and/or threatening to kill Zionists would continue. And when their demands weren’t met, that behavior continued and escalated to Hamilton Hall incident.
Everyone defends Khalil because he wasn’t physically present at Hamilton Hall. But he was negotiating on behalf of those that ambushed Hamilton Hall, before and after the incident using it as leverage to get what he wanted.
This is like if two people kidnap someone and a third person calls to demand a ransom. Threatening if their demands aren’t met, the kidnapping victim would be killed. The demands don’t get met and the two kidnappers kill the victim. And you are like, the hostage negotiator was just exercising his free speech rights.
No, he was a part of the crime as much as Khalil was a part of the blocking access to classrooms, occupying administrative offices, harassing other students, and/or threatening to kill Zionists.
Khalil was just stupid enough to think that “just being the negotiator” somehow protected him.
You can’t hold a gun to someone’s head and demand concessions and claim it’s free speech. The fact that he was threatening to use mobs of protesters taking over buildings to effectuate his goals, takes this out of the realm of free “speech.”
re: The left is now concerned about the wealthy.
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/4/25 at 10:44 am to SaintsReportExile
quote:
Keep in mind, only about 8% of the US population owns stock. And in that 8% is made up of the wealthiest 1% if not more. And this is who the left is upset for right now as Trump works his magic to help make our country better in the long term AND to help reduce prices in the long term.
60% of the US owns stock. But, the wealthiest 10% own like 93% of all US stock. He’s probably confusing that number.
re: S&P 500 has its 2nd worst day in the last decade.
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/3/25 at 9:43 pm to Hoopla
It’s weird to me that liberals melt that Trump is protecting the wealthy…yet also melt when the stock market drops.
40% of Americans don’t even own stock. Do you think those 40% give a crap about the stock market?
The richest 10% in the US owns 93% of all US stock.
40% of Americans don’t even own stock. Do you think those 40% give a crap about the stock market?
The richest 10% in the US owns 93% of all US stock.
re: Where is the national outrage and screams of racism for this victim?
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/2/25 at 11:23 pm to Meauxjeaux
quote:
The frick you can’t. Plenty of people have been killed with a single punch.
The key is whether or not a "reasonable" person would agree that the person who stabbed him felt that the puncher was a serious threat to their life. Under the facts of the supposed story, I highly doubt a jury would support self defense for some dude that’s bringing knife to a track meet and stabs a kid in the heart for allegedly throwing a punch.
Kids get in scuffles all the time and no one dies.
re: Where is the national outrage and screams of racism for this victim?
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/2/25 at 11:16 pm to Chet Donnely
quote:
One where they teach you that you can’t stab someone in the heart because they throw a punch at you at a track event.
Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you were disputing my post saying that it wouldn’t be self defense.
Appears we are in complete agreement
re: Where is the national outrage and screams of racism for this victim?
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/2/25 at 11:09 pm to Chet Donnely
What law school did you attend?
re: Where is the national outrage and screams of racism for this victim?
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/2/25 at 11:05 pm to stout
quote:
A first-degree murder charge wouldn't be warranted if his story were accurate. It would be self-defense.
I have no idea if the rumors are true. Just commenting on the fact that even if they were true, it’s not self defense.
You can’t use lethal force (stabbing with a knife) if someone throws a punch. The force you use has to be proportional to the threat you face.
re: Dems file lawsuit against Trump to stop executive order banning non-citizens from voting
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/2/25 at 12:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
None of this is arguing that non-citizens should be permitted to vote legally.
It is arguing that no one can check to see if noncitizens are voting illegally. Stop being ridiculous.
re: Dems file lawsuit against Trump to stop executive order banning non-citizens from voting
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 4/2/25 at 12:44 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Which language in the lawsuit? Again, I only found one reference and the implication is the opposite (as they reference the data that non-citizens voting is rare implies this is illegal and not what they're supporting).
You are entirely disingenuous. How about you search “citizenship” it’s in there 60 times. And “proof” is in there 24 times.
How about you actually read the lawsuit? They are challenging Trumps efforts for voters to show proof of citizenship, they are challenging his withholding of federal funds to states that don’t require proof of citizenship, and they are challenging DOGEs access to federal immigration databases because they don’t want DOGE to compare that database to states voter registration lists.
re: More Background Information On Mahmoud Khalil:
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 3/21/25 at 1:07 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Certainly, I must have missed all the videos of Khalil engaging in these various ... behaviors. Doubtless, there are hundreds of such videos, and I am just too incompetent in google search syntax to find even one of them. Doubtless, your skillset far exceeds my own. Perhaps you would do me the kindness of linking a few such videos. I would be eternally grateful.
Khalil was negotiating on behalf of the people doing this. He was threatening the administration that they must give in to their demands or blocking access to classrooms, occupying administrative offices, harassing other students, and/or threatening to kill Zionists would continue. And when their demands weren’t met, that behavior continued.
This is like if two people kidnap someone and a third person calls to demand a ransom. Threatening if their demands aren’t met, the kidnapping victim would be killed. The demands don’t get met and the two kidnappers kill the victim. And you are like, the hostage negotiator was just exercising his free speech rights. There’s no evidence he kidnapped or killed anybody.
He was a part of the crime as much as Khalil was a part of the blocking access to classrooms, occupying administrative offices, harassing other students, and/or threatening to kill Zionists.
Khalil was just stupid enough to think that “just being the negotiator” somehow protected him.
You can’t hold a gun to someone’s head and demand concessions and claim it’s free speech. The fact that he was threatening to use mobs of violent protesters to effectuate his goals, takes this out of the realm of free “speech.”
re: DOJ Again Refuses to Give Judge Boasberg Sensitive Information on National Security
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 3/19/25 at 3:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Based on what I've found, I can only find it being invoked under 3 wars. The War of 1812, WW1, and WW2.
Just because it wasn’t invoked on 9/11 doesn’t mean it couldn’t have been.
The statute doesn’t require an active war. An invasion or incursion (or threat thereof) is enough.
Pearl Harbor is what precipitated the use of the AEA during WWII and not a single foreign soldier stepped foot in Hawaii.
re: DOJ Again Refuses to Give Judge Boasberg Sensitive Information on National Security
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 3/19/25 at 3:17 pm to GamecockUltimate
quote:
200 people is not really an invasion or an incursion
It took what 5 people to kill thousands on 9/11. There’s no statutory limit on the “size of the incursion” but nice try.
re: DOJ Again Refuses to Give Judge Boasberg Sensitive Information on National Security
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 3/19/25 at 3:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
If only the administration had to prove this in court
Supreme Court says he doesn’t have to. Not justiciable.
re: DOJ Again Refuses to Give Judge Boasberg Sensitive Information on National Security
Posted by LSUFAITHFUL2 on 3/19/25 at 3:12 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That's literally what is going on.
Sure, just keep ignoring all things I cited…like The NY Times, the Chilean Govt, the Miami Herald, and Maduro’s opposition (the rightly elected VZ govt) that agree with Trump—-that Maduro is running TdA.
Popular
74
