DISCLAIMER: this is not my content that was removed, I just came across it in the modlog and found it to be absurd. If it’s not allowed, I totally understand.
Reason removed was because it’s unrelated.
Unrelated……
The guy was illegally deported without due process. And yet for some reason, suggesting so is somehow “unrelated” to a meme that is trying to say that because he is affiliated (no charges were ever filed against him for gang-related activity) with a gang, he is by default, guilty.
What’s ironic, is that the entire point of the meme is that the bullshit about him being in MS-13 is unrelated to the fact that people want accountability for this administration illegally deporting a man without due process.
This mod has definitely chosen the correct name.
And even taken into consideration that the instance is essentially a troll haven for wayward 4Chan refugees, they should still have to adhere to the rules of common sense.
Already proven in court. Twice.
On the off-chance that you don’t actually know that what you’ve said is incorrect, here’s a link to wikipedia. Skip on down to the section, “2019 detention and bond hearings.” You’ll see that whatever dumbass told you that a court “proved” that Mr. Garcia was related to MS-13 was saying that ICE found that he couldn’t prove he wasn’t, once, and they upheld that he couldn’t prove he wasn’t, on an appeal. Neither of which is proving anything in court once, let alone twice.
Further, an immigration judge granted him “withholding of removal” status. This is notable because it’s much harder to get a “withholding of removal” than getting granted asylum, because you have to prove that if you’re sent to the country in question, the government will either persecute you, or choose not to protect you from prosecution.
So, to recap, it’s not only not been proved that this guy has any relation to MS-13, but it’s been proven to an actual court that if he gets sent to El Salvador, the Barrio 18 gang will kill him. Because the only evidence he has any connection to a gang, is that there’s a gang that wants to kill him.
Wrong. About pretty much everything you just said.
https://ijr.com/doj-releases-full-dossier-of-evidence-that-abrego-garcia-was-ms-13/
He was proven to be MS-13. He doesn’t have to prove he isn’t, they have to prove he is - and they did. Twice. That’s how courts work.
FYI Wikipedia is not a trusted or reliable source. Avoid using it in future. There’s a reason it’s not allowed as a source in higher education.
Also wrong about the withholding of removal order. He was not granted that due to government persecution - he was granted it because the main rival gang to MS-13 would likely target him. What a strange thing to rule if he isn’t an MS-13 member, right?
So… the thing is, you linked a right-wing nutjob site, but! I looked into it anyway because I’m always willing to do that. And if you scroll down to where the rag you’re linking says, “which he has disputed in court, are included in the release,” you would see the word “included” there is a hyperlink to a justice.gov website, which is the documents involved with the subsection, “2019 detention and bond hearings” to which I directed you.
That document is an officer talking about the other men that Garcia was with, they’re suspected ties to MS-13, and then they talk about Garcia. Why was he suspected of being with MS-13? He was wearing a Chicago Bulls hat. “Officers know such clothing to be indicative of the Hispanic gang culture.” His crime was being in a Home Depot parking lot, looking for work, and wearing a Chicago Bulls hat. And I can’t stress enough that the wikipedia link which you found less trustworthy than this garbage, had all of this information!
To continue showing evidence of what I say, here is a link to an actual court document, citing the withholding of removal order. Which was granted. What you’re looking for is at the bottom of page 2- “Although Abrego Garcia was found removable, the immigration judge granted him withholding of removal to El Salvador in an order dated October 10, 2019.”
That ‘court document,’ is the Defendant’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. Why am I emphasizing that? Because this was filed by the Department of Homeland Security. This is a document, supplied to court, by Trump’s administration, which states that the withholding status was granted.
You can send me garbage articles from idiots all day but nothing will compete with, “Kristi Noem and the Department of Homeland Security list that the withholding status was granted in an actual filing with the court.” And they not only state that it was granted, they do so under the heading, “Statement of Facts.” Enjoy.
Finally, the reason that the Barrio 18 was after him had nothing to do with MS-13. They were after him, like they had been after his older brother before him- his mother owns a business, and the Barrio 18 were extorting her.
I’d say I’m looking forward to your next reply, but I’m sure it’ll be an extensive moving of goalposts. He had the withholding status. He shouldn’t have been deported. The Supreme Court agrees with me. That’s really all I need.
Sure it has. Go on, do tell. Which court? What case? Who was the Judge?
Immigration court.
https://ijr.com/doj-releases-full-dossier-of-evidence-that-abrego-garcia-was-ms-13/
Ok, that’s something. Let’s see, the article headline still says “DOJ Releases Dossier Of Deported Maryland Man’s Alleged MS-13 Gang Ties.” Emphasis added by me. Now why would they say “alleged” if the court already found him guilty? Ah, right, because those were bond hearings. Yes, I actually read the legal documents linked by that article and both court findings were that the unproven claims of gang affiliation, combined with the fact that he had missed traffic court in the past, were sufficient to deny release on bond until his status hearing could be held. No further hearing was ever held. At no point did the legal system establish guilt, make a definitive finding of fact, or make a judicial decision on his deportation.
So, unless you have other court records to link me to that show otherwise, then you are wrong: no such thing has been legally proven.
Edit: Even the appeals Judge refers to it as “allegations of gang affiliation” in their order affirming the lower court decision that you are calling proof.