(04-30-2025, 08:12 PM)Sneakers Wrote:

(04-29-2025, 10:07 AM)mikesez Wrote: 1. We agree on terms.  I don't believe anyone is being imprisoned in the US without a trial currently. However it seems we sent 200 to 300 people to El Salvador, without giving them a trial here, and it seems they won't get a trial there.  I ask you for the second time, please answer directly the direct question, should we, without having any trial under our law, send people to countries that will imprison them without trials under their law? Is there a group of people who somehow deserve to be in prisoned without ever having trials?

2. We don't know If Albrego Garcia turned himself in or not at any point. We do know that he appeared in front of judges multiple times, and those judges said that he should not be returned to El Salvador, because his life was in danger there. In fact, Trump administration officials themselves initially admitted that they did not mean to send him back, that they were unaware of these previous rulings. How do you square that with their current claim that they did the right thing? 

3. This philosophical conversation, like any other, would be pretty useless if we did not try to apply it to current salient cases. 

4. There is such a thing as international law, some of which has been ratified by the US Senate in the form of treaties over the centuries. When a treaty is ratified by the United States Senate, it becomes law in the United States, this is in the Constitution. This includes the ideas of political asylum that we are discussing.



All of these are fact claims that could and should be brought up at a trial,  So the man can get an opportunity to contest them

1.  Now you're just regurgitating the Leftist rhetoric.  What do you want to charge them with here and what should they be charged with in El Salvador, or whatever country to which they're deported?  
To answer your question, if they entered the US illegally and are caught hiding from law enforcement, then they should be deported to their country of origin.  

2.  Again, you're trying to defend Garcia.  If he had turned himself in, don't you think the liberal media would be trumpeting it in an effort to elicit sympathy for his case?

3.  LOL.  Moving the goalpost again to support your argument of the moment.   

4.  This discussion is not, and never has been, about individuals seeking political asylum.  To suggest otherwise is an insult to all those who fled truly oppressive regimes.  Picture a bunch of Cubans clinging to a raft a hundred miles from land or an East German caught in the razor wire on the Berlin Wall and tell me again how politically oppressed this guy was.

The whole point 149 is making is that we don't HAVE to give them a trial.  If they're here illegally, we can save the time and expense and simply deport them.  They're NOT US citizens, and therefore DON"T have the same rights.

An illegal immigrant deserves a hearing not a trial. Trials are for people who are going to be sentenced to prison.  Hearings are for people who are in less serious trouble.

If an illegal immigrant is arrested, we need to have a hearing to double-check their identity, that they don't have the proper visa, that they don't qualify for asylum, then we deport them.  Just a hearing.  Not a trial. If we didn't have a hearing, we might have the wrong guy and not realize it.  Once we're sure we have the right person, we send them back to their country, to live as a free person there.

But if that country is going to imprison them, without any trial, we shouldn't send them there.  Albrego Garcia wasn't tried here, and he wasn't tried in El Salvador, yet he is in a prison in El Salvador.

Any country that imprisons its own citizens without trial is another North Korea or Cuba.  Don't let the lack of Marxist propaganda confuse you.  Lawlessness is lawlessness.  Dictators are dictators.

---