The Next President is...

[HeloDude]

2 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

I’m going to assume you didn’t read the article?

“The filing stems from a lawsuit over the removal of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national who in 2019 was granted protected status by an immigration judge, prohibiting the federal government from sending him to El Salvador.”

He came here illegally, did he not?  Why you guys want to protect people who break our laws and come here illegally is beyond me.  It doesn’t shock me that we have activists judges who are intentionally trying to circumvent US law.  But hey, Trump won on this issue, so I’m all about seeing the left continue to give Trump this gift.

Again, am I supposed to be upset this guy returned to country of origin?

[busdriver]

2 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

Again, am I supposed to be upset this guy returned to country of origin?

No, you're supposed to be cranky that the US gov is shitting on due process.

[HeloDude]

3 minutes ago, busdriver said:

No, you're supposed to be cranky that the US gov is shitting on due process.

First, I’m cranky that we have activist judges stopping the law from being enforced in the first place.  Biden, or whoever was really in charge the last few years, knew this all too well…that it would be difficult deport all these illegal aliens.  We should really be asking why the last administration so easily allows them to come here?  

[busdriver]

19 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

First, I’m cranky that we have activist judges stopping the law from being enforced in the first place.  Biden, or whoever was really in charge the last few years, knew this all too well…that it would be difficult deport all these illegal aliens.  We should really be asking why the last administration so easily allows them to come here?  

Protections against government action are delicate.  You destroy them, the next asshole just turns the government gun against their enemies, and on and on.  

wrath is a motherfucker

[brickhistory]

34 minutes ago, busdriver said:

Protections against government action are delicate.  You destroy them, the next asshole just turns the government gun against their enemies, and on and on.  

wrath is a motherfucker

Indeed.

Weaponizing the IRS against the Tea Party; the FBI against Trump and his associates - to include lying to a judge to obtain a bogus warrant (and getting a admin wrist slap, not disbarment for the individual), turning the NSC against a sitting President to impeach him over a pretty benign conversation, literally lying about the provenance of Hunter's laptop to skew the election, turning DoD against service members over an experimental COVID vaccine, having the Chairman, JCS, go outside the chain of command, to include potential adversaries, never mind non-chain politicians, etc, etc, et-bloody-cetera does tend to have follow-on effects.

Them's the rules now...fight's on.

[busdriver]

32 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Them's the rules now...fight's on.

Copy.  Wrath.  Have fun.  But don't bitch if your side loses in the end.

[Sua Sponte]

1 hour ago, HeloDude said:

He came here illegally, did he not?  Why you guys want to protect people who break our laws and come here illegally is beyond me.  It doesn’t shock me that we have activists judges who are intentionally trying to circumvent US law.  But hey, Trump won on this issue, so I’m all about seeing the left continue to give Trump this gift.

Again, am I supposed to be upset this guy returned to country of origin?

He did, and then a federal judge via due process said he could be deported, but not to where he's from. He was deported to where he's from, thus breaking a court order. An immigration judge gave him due process by a hearing to determine if he can be deported back to where he's from (he couldn't). The government doesn't get to break a court order just because they don't agree with something. It's called due process, so appeal if you don't like the ruling, but that also doesn't mean it's going to go your way. I don't think pilots care about the opinions of judges on how to fly aircraft; judges don't care about pilot's opinions of their judicial review of a case. Don't agree with that? Go to law school and take the bar. We don't live in a Kafkaesque society.

Remember, they are "activist judges" when they don't rule in favor of your home team. Funny how you were pretty quiet when the judges were ruling against Biden's student loan forgiveness. 

Edited 22 hours ago by Sua Sponte

[brickhistory]

8 minutes ago, busdriver said:

Copy.  Wrath.  Have fun.  But don't bitch if your side loses in the end.

Nope, no fun.

Sadness.  But the journey has begun and that train has sailed.

I railed here about the left doing these things during Bush's two terms, against the Tea Party in 2010, and all the other things that Chicago Way Obama brought to the modern arena (although our history is replete with similar behavior all the way back to Jefferson, et al).  I said that the Left would regret their actions because the eventual reaction would be coming.

And it has arrived...

Edited 22 hours ago by brickhistory

[Sua Sponte]

1 hour ago, HeloDude said:

First, I’m cranky that we have activist judges stopping the law from being enforced in the first place.  Biden, or whoever was really in charge the last few years, knew this all too well…that it would be difficult deport all these illegal aliens.  We should really be asking why the last administration so easily allows them to come here?  

It's called judicial review. Don't like it? Appeal. Don't like the law? Run for Congress. 

[HeloDude]

10 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

It's called judicial review. Don't like it? Appeal. Don't like the law? Run for Congress. 

So if and when the cuts to federal employees come, you’ll be ok with it, right?  It’s called the law I suppose.  Don’t like it, run for Congress.

[busdriver]

11 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Nope, no fun.

Sadness.  But the journey has begun and that train has sailed.

And it has arrived...

I don't disagree.  I am sad and frustrated when people who should know better revel in the shit, and abandon their professed values.  

[Sua Sponte]

1 minute ago, HeloDude said:

So if and when the cuts to federal employees come, you’ll be ok with it, right?  It’s called the law I suppose.  Don’t like it, run for Congress.

Come? Where the fuck have you been in the past few months? Are they legal cuts or illegal cuts? The current administration sure has been taking some losses in the courts for illegal firing, then rehiring, federal employees (which costs taxpayers even more money).

[HeloDude]

3 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

Come? Where the fuck have you been in the past few months? Are they legal cuts or illegal cuts? The current administration sure has been taking some losses in the courts for illegal firing, then rehiring, federal employees (which costs taxpayers even more money).

I expect SCOTUS to rule in Trump’s favor.  Hence the “if and when” part of my post.  And then you’ll be good it with it I suppose.  

[brickhistory]

5 minutes ago, busdriver said:

I don't disagree.  I am sad and frustrated when people who should know better revel in the shit, and abandon their professed values.  

Those "professed values" got kicked in their teeth repeatedly for quite a while.

"Conspiracy theory," "trust the science," "Russia, Russia, Russia," etc, etc, etc.

I want perp walks, I want court-martials, I want massive deportations.

I want consequences so that maybe, just maybe, we can walk this back some.

But it won't be rewound.  Next time the pendulum swings, the revenge will be against the Right, again.

[Sua Sponte]

1 minute ago, HeloDude said:

I expect SCOTUS to rule in Trump’s favor.  Hence the “if and when” part of my post.  And then you’ll be good it with it I suppose.  

Yeah, MAGAats like yourself REALLY expected Coney Barrett to go along with the conservatives for the Trump 2.0 issues already brought to the court. Unfortunately for you, Roberts and her have been handing out some losses to your cult by siding with the liberals on the court. I guess they must be "activist judges," right? Better go on X and shitpost calling for their impeachment, I guess?

I don't understand the "if and when" part of your post. Are you assuming you know how the DoD RIF process works or have seen it? I have, and I won't be part of that but continue to spout off about conjecture of things you don't know.

[busdriver]

7 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Those "professed values" got kicked in their teeth repeatedly for quite a while.

"Conspiracy theory," "trust the science," "Russia, Russia, Russia," etc, etc, etc.

I want perp walks, I want court-martials, I want massive deportations.

I want consequences so that maybe, just maybe, we can walk this back some.

But it won't be rewound.  Next time the pendulum swings, the revenge will be against the Right, again.

wrath, and nihilism

[brickhistory]

[brickhistory]

5 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

Yeah, MAGAats like yourself REALLY expected Coney Barrett to go along with the conservatives for the Trump 2.0 issues already brought to the court. Unfortunately for you, Roberts and her have been handing out some losses to your cult by siding with the liberals on the court. I guess they must be "activist judges," right? Better go on X and shitpost calling for their impeachment, I guess?

I don't understand the "if and when" part of your post. Are you assuming you know how the DoD RIF process works or have seen it? I have, and I won't be part of that but continue to spout off about conjecture of things you don't know.

Fine, fine example of that grad school polish you so cherish...

[Sua Sponte]

1 minute ago, brickhistory said:

Fine, fine example of that grad school polish you so cherish...

Which one? I've graduated from a few.

[HeloDude]

5 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

Yeah, MAGAats like yourself REALLY expected Coney Barrett to go along with the conservatives for the Trump 2.0 issues already brought to the court. Unfortunately for you, Roberts and her have been handing out some losses to your cult by siding with the liberals on the court. I guess they must be "activist judges," right? Better go on X and shitpost calling for their impeachment, I guess?

I don't understand the "if and when" part of your post. Are you assuming you know how the DoD RIF process works or have seen it? I have, and I won't be part of that but continue to spout off about conjecture of things you don't know.

I was in the AF for 3 RIFs—one around 2007, one in 2010/11 timeframe, and the bigger one in 2014.  Funny, I don’t recall progressives getting all butthurt about military members losing their jobs.

I’m a fan of discussing the issues, not just a blanket whatever Trump is doing, though I do like most of it.  If you’re curious to know where I stand on any issue, ask away.  But yes, I agree much more with Trump than with Kamala.  If you want to paint me with a broad brush though, I most likely agree with Massie or Rand Paul.  

[Sua Sponte]

Just now, HeloDude said:

I was in the AF for 3 RIFs—one around 2007, one in 2010/11 timeframe, and the bigger one in 2014.  Funny, I don’t recall progressives getting all butthurt about military members losing their jobs.

I’m a fan of discussing the issues, not just a blanket whatever Trump is doing, though I do like most of it.  If you’re curious to know where I stand on any issue, ask away.  But yes, I agree much more with Trump than with Kamala.  If you want to paint me with a broad brush though, I most likely agree with Massie or Rand Paul.  

That's great, and so was I. By the way, Military RIF =! Civilian RIF when it comes to procedures and weighted categories. The DoD has different RIFing procedures than what OPM sends out to the other agencies.

So, do you agree with Paul voting today with the Dems on the Senate resolution against the Canadian tariffs? 

[SurelySerious]

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, Sua Sponte said:

That's great, and so was I. By the way, Military RIF =! Civilian RIF when it comes to procedures and weighted categories. The DoD has different RIFing procedures than what OPM sends out to the other agencies.

So, do you agree with Paul voting today with the Dems on the Senate resolution against the Canadian tariffs? 

I honestly appreciate the legitimate question.
 

I’m very anti-tariff on principle…because I’m very anti-tax on principle.  Now Trump saying he can use tariffs (or their threat) to better position us wrt trade agreements, then I’d like to see what that can do strategy wise.  Because let’s not pretend that tariffs on our exports with other countries (not necessarily speaking about Canada) are very fair.  But tariffs for the sake of tariffs, yeah, they suck…just like all the other taxes.

But politically, does anybody rationally think that Trump’s greatest opposition in the US wrt to tariffs are because those same people are against taxes?

[TreeA10]

And now, the rest of the story.  The deported father from Maryland was convicted of being a MS-13 gang member in 2019.  

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2025/04/02/the-fine-print-on-deportations-matters-n2654819

[Sua Sponte]

1 hour ago, TreeA10 said:

And now, the rest of the story.  The deported father from Maryland was convicted of being a MS-13 gang member in 2019.  

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2025/04/02/the-fine-print-on-deportations-matters-n2654819

The rest of the story is a blog citing some random X account that did some “analysis” of court documents where the judge found a preponderance of evidence to deny bond, but to not order removal?

 

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by Sua Sponte