• Re: RE: Re: What the Constitution, Supreme Court say about 'due process

    From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Thu Jun 5 19:45:52 2025
    On 6/5/2025 6:42 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Wed Jun 4 13:27:52 2025 Rolf Mantel wrote:

    So you claim to be a US citizen, the government claim you're not.
    Should you get a hearing or should the government deport you without a
    hearing?




    hat is not an argument Rolf. You cannot argue with either an honest birth certificate or now a Real ID. Birth Certificates are certified at the time and place of your birth.

    I have no doubt that 'Real ID' will be counterfeited equally
    as well as current ID. Post haste.

    And birth certificates are certified 'as valid copy' by the
    registrar or clerk when the duplicate is made. You will
    never see the original record.

    (I have never seen mine, or a copy, in any form. I believe
    that it likely exists in the county record but I never had
    to produce a copy and never pursued it.)

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Thu Jun 5 19:48:11 2025
    On 6/5/2025 7:02 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Thu Jun 5 17:09:50 2025 Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 16:09:30 -0400, Zen Cycle <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    On 6/5/2025 2:14 PM, AMuzi wrote:
    On 6/5/2025 12:59 PM, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <[email protected]>,
    Catrike Ryder? <[email protected]> wrote:
    No, they mnay have got a hearing when they showed that they were
    citizens, but not before.

    And so you must always carry proof of citizenship 100% of the time, or >>>>> else you're deported without hearing. Don't leave home without it, kids. >>>>>

    I'm not advocating either way but merely being a US citizen and walking >>>> around with no ID can get you arrested (depends on the jurisdiction and >>>> circumstances).

    https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Failure- >>>> identify-police-officer.htm

    https://legalclarity.org/do-you-have-to-identify-yourself-to-the-police/ >>>
    There's a difference between refusing to identify yourself and not
    producing identification. The former is generally what your links are
    referring to. Failure to produce identification isn't an offense...yet

    There were (are?) places where no ID and "no visible means of support" >>>> is defined as vagrancy = 3 days and a ride to the county line.? Happened >>>> to me, long ago.

    There aren't many enforced statutes anymore for failure to produce ID,
    in large part due to the 1972 SCoTUS ruling in Papachristou v.
    Jacksonville which invalidated the Jacksonville vagrancy law as
    "unconstitutionally vague" (aka "Void for Vagueness").

    The ruling was unanimous and forced states to amend their vagrancy and
    loitering laws to the extent that vagrancy is no longer anything more
    than an insult.

    https://www.law.virginia.edu/scholarship/publication/risa-goluboff/640716 >>>
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papachristou_v._City_of_Jacksonville

    .
    Supposedly the "real Id" thing corrected that, but it would surprise
    me if some blue states issued them to illegals.




    That would be a serious felony.

    In theory maybe.
    It's ongoing; no charges, no convictions and none in the
    foreseeable future.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Thu Jun 5 19:49:36 2025
    On 6/5/2025 7:07 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Thu Jun 5 14:55:39 2025 AMuzi wrote:
    On 6/5/2025 2:38 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 13:14:40 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 6/5/2025 12:59 PM, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <[email protected]>,
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    No, they mnay have got a hearing when they showed that they were
    citizens, but not before.

    And so you must always carry proof of citizenship 100% of the time, or >>>>> else you're deported without hearing. Don't leave home without it, kids. >>>>>

    I'm not advocating either way but merely being a US citizen
    and walking around with no ID can get you arrested (depends
    on the jurisdiction and circumstances).

    https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Failure-identify-police-officer.htm

    https://legalclarity.org/do-you-have-to-identify-yourself-to-the-police/ >>>>
    There were (are?) places where no ID and "no visible means
    of support" is defined as vagrancy = 3 days and a ride to
    the county line. Happened to me, long ago.

    Vagrancy is another thing.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    It's an unclear issue, especially that some States hand out
    ID and even driving licenses to illegal aliens. US citizen
    vagrants would imaginably be unable to prove identity while
    standing next to a deportable illegal with valid ID.

    Again I take no position on this or that but "no ID" is a
    very fuzzy standard.




    A driver's lisence is suppose to clearly say citizen or undocumented alien.


    And you trust Shirley Weber on that??
    I do not.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Fri Jun 6 15:28:50 2025
    On 6/6/2025 2:06 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Tue Jun 3 19:20:36 2025 AMuzi wrote:
    On 6/3/2025 7:02 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 18:37:18 -0500, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 6/3/2025 5:57 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 22:10:14 -0000 (UTC), Beej Jorgensen <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote:

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    There are thousand of illegals. It would take years and $$$$$ to >>>>>>> process them all through the courts... and besides, it's not
    necessary.

    I sincerely hope for your sake you never have the finger pointed at you >>>>>> through administrative error.

    I'm neither in the USA illegally, nor have I committed any crimes, so >>>>> you needn't worry.

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    It's not that. It's the possibility of an error such as I
    referenced recently:

    https://atlantablackstar.com/2024/09/08/elderly-new-jersey-woman-jailed-for-two-weeks-in-wrongful-arrest-cant-sue-u-s-marshals-court-rules/

    IMHO that woman is owed a lot and formal public apologies
    all around. But so far nada. (p.s. note dates in that story)

    I hope she get's big bucks and the people behind the arrest loose
    their jobs and their pensions. Mistakes have occurred in all areas of
    law enforcement.... but still, we cannot process all the illegals
    through the court systems. In the mean time, I'm not going to worry
    about being misidentified and sent to prison any more than I worry
    about getting hit with a meteorite

    --
    C'est bon
    Soloman

    OK that's reasonable, but Mr Jorgensen has a point.

    She's not an one-off. There are a couple dozen of those
    every year. Every year.

    Suing for false arrest and then for damages is a dicey
    process depending on jurisdiction and the personalities
    involved.

    The Statutes are clear about illegal alien criminals. Then
    again, the laws are very clear about US citizens' civil
    rights too...




    But the laws were designed when the problem was hundreds and not millions.


    Was there some deficiency in the Statutes? There's been no
    serious move in Congress to change immigration law since the
    1990s. Or, as a noted person said, "We didn't need new laws.
    We needed a new President."

    https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-land-border-encounters

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Beej Jorgensen on Fri Jun 6 23:26:27 2025
    On 6/6/2025 8:24 PM, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <pbq0Q.746378$[email protected]>,
    cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
    I have a Real ID in my pocket right now. All traveler outside of the
    national boundaries has to show proof of citizenship (a passport) at
    all times.

    Indeed, you should carry it inside the national boundaries at all times,
    as well, since some people apparently think you can be deported without
    a hearing if anyone suspects you of being in the country illegally.

    Look, I watched approximately 100 illegals vote for Obama at my local
    voting place.

    I'm really curious how you knew for a fact they were illegal. But that's
    not really what I'm on about here.

    What I'm on about is that without a hearing, any crooked cop could point
    a finger at you and have you deported to prison for life for being an
    illegal immigrant. It's all about the due process.

    Do you REALLY think that anything close to a majority voted for Biden?

    I wasn't sure, but after Trump lost 60+ court cases trying to prove
    illegal voting activity, I'm pretty confident that things were on the up-and-up overall. 60+ court cases is a LOT of vetting. Hats off to
    Trump for being so thorough. :)


    That remains an open question as every one of those was
    dismissed or decided on standing, latches or other process
    issues. There was no evidence or testimony entered into a
    court record. We just don't know (our own beliefs
    notwithstanding) and likely never will.

    Questions remain such as
    https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-9647421250

    and the famous 2d graph here https://leeblynelle.pages.dev/xquypzf-popular-vote-2024-election-totals-eomysyb/

    which may have innocuous explanations. Or not.



    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Beej Jorgensen on Fri Jun 6 23:31:40 2025
    On 6/6/2025 8:48 PM, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <A0p0Q.542754$[email protected]>,
    cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
    Are you saying you're willing to foot the bill for paying for enough
    prisons to house these people until the inrvitsble "tguilty" sends them
    on their way.

    Yes, I absolutely am. Because without due process, we no longer live in
    a free country. I am willing to pay almost unlimited amounts of money to
    keep us living in a free country.

    Those sections of the Constitution were written when the Democrats
    weren't peying criminals to come to the US to practice their trade.

    There's a mechanism in the Constitution to remove the due process rules
    if you want to do that. But I strenuously suggest you do not. A million Americans have given their lives defending those parts of our founding document, so it might be wise to think twice before you shrug them off.


    Unlike US citizens, illegal aliens have committed a
    deportable crime by illegal entry, just by the fact of being
    present.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Beej Jorgensen on Sat Jun 7 08:05:21 2025
    On 6/6/2025 9:24 PM, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <pbq0Q.746378$[email protected]>,
    cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
    I have a Real ID in my pocket right now. All traveler outside of the
    national boundaries has to show proof of citizenship (a passport) at
    all times.

    Indeed, you should carry it inside the national boundaries at all times,
    as well, since some people apparently think you can be deported without
    a hearing if anyone suspects you of being in the country illegally.

    Look, I watched approximately 100 illegals vote for Obama at my local
    voting place.

    I'm really curious how you knew for a fact they were illegal. But that's
    not really what I'm on about here.

    Tommy has magic powers. He can tell if someone is an illegal immigrant
    and illiterate just by looking at them. He doesn't even have to be close up!


    What I'm on about is that without a hearing, any crooked cop could point
    a finger at you and have you deported to prison for life for being an
    illegal immigrant. It's all about the due process.

    Do you REALLY think that anything close to a majority voted for Biden?

    I wasn't sure, but after Trump lost 60+ court cases trying to prove
    illegal voting activity, I'm pretty confident that things were on the up-and-up overall. 60+ court cases is a LOT of vetting. Hats off to
    Trump for being so thorough. :)

    there was never any doubt in my mind that the election was fair and
    completely legitimate. The magatards claims make no more sense than
    claiming the sun wasn't going to rise tomorrow.



    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Beej Jorgensen on Sat Jun 7 08:27:51 2025
    On 6/6/2025 9:50 PM, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <FPo0Q.542385$[email protected]>,
    cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
    Were it relly the case that we deported a member of MS-13 mistakenly
    under mistaken identity [...] why did he have a warrany out for him in
    his home country? And how did he manage to stay alive here since MS-13
    kill fakers?

    I don't know. Let's get it to court and get an answer, what do you say?


    That's already been determined. He had a hearing which did _not_
    determine him to be a member of any gang, and there wasn't a warrant out
    for him in Guatemala.

    You're new here, you have to realize tommy just makes stuff up on the
    fly most of the time, other times he just repeats what he's read
    somewhere as long as it comports with his world view.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Sun Jun 8 08:39:13 2025
    On 6/7/2025 6:13 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Wed Jun 4 19:08:36 2025 Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <[email protected]>,
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    US citizens should indeed get a hearing.

    So if the government says you're not a US citizen (even if you are), you
    don't get a hearing. This is a planet-sized loophole, you see?




    Where do you get the idea that you don't get a hearing? If you have a birth certificate or a up to date passport or a Real ID, that is proof that you're an American citizen. What is with you people repeating the Slime Stream Media lies? This is why
    NONE of the news shows are trusted and even the Wall Street Journal and New York Times are considered no more trustworthy than the supermarket tattle tale sheets.

    We have ABSOLUTE PROOF that the CIA assassinated JFK and the Democrats let the entire thing slide.

    We do not have proof sufficient for a conviction of anyone,
    relevant evidence having been destroyed long ago. There are
    strong suggestions, many and compelling, but not proof.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Mon Jun 9 13:25:33 2025
    On 6/9/2025 12:45 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Sat Jun 7 15:06:15 2025 Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <1020f63$2pd7f$[email protected]>, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
    In our Constitution, the Article III courts may only decide "cases and
    controversies" by applying the laws as written. They have no policy,
    legislative or oversight authority.

    My point is that if you are wrongly arrested, the courts can free you.
    That "oversight" is what I'm referring to.




    I have asked you your age and what you do for a living and you have not answered. I can therefore only assume that you are young and not employed. And unemployable people usually are drug addicts. It doesn't bother you in the least if you're a drag on
    society and you're not paying taxes and so wish not to follow the Constitution in the most economical way, hut rather wish to take us on the most expensive route possible.

    It appears to me the direction you're traveling is towards homelessness and fentanyl addiction ending in overdose and death. While the world would be better off without Flunky, Liebermann and Krygowski, it needs all of the lawful and honest young
    people that it can get and the Democrats have twisted the narative that having money is bad and it should be taxed away from you. That is communism pure and simple. So what are your actual beliefs?

    Either Mr Jorgensen's argument is valid or it isn't. In this
    case it is (IMHO of course).

    Given his argument, you may agree or you may disagree as you
    wish. If you disagree, you ought to provide a counter
    argument or disparate facts. You did neither.

    No matter who Mr Jorgensen may be, no matter what he does or
    does not do, it's immaterial. You either agree or disagree
    with what he wrote and that's that.

    Instead you assumed he is young. For no obvious reason.
    You assumed young people are unemployed.
    You assumed unemployed are drug addicts.
    You even posited that drug addicts are a drag on society.
    Some indeed are. Some are not.

    You accused Mr Jorgensen of not paying taxes. That's the
    same sort of vicious lie Mr Reid used to unfairly smear Mr
    Romney in an historically deplorable incident, even for the
    general low character of US Senators.


    In short, nothing of value was added and instead of
    pondering Mr Jorgensen's character, your post made us all
    question yours.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Zen Cycle@21:1/5 to Beej Jorgensen on Wed Jun 11 14:36:51 2025
    On 6/11/2025 1:31 PM, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <8jG1Q.965767$[email protected]>,
    cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
    I'm curious to know why you think that citizens can be declared as
    criminals without court trial findings?

    I would have thought this was obvious, but:

    You have to remember who you're responding to.


    1. A law enforcement agency accuses a citizen of being a non-citizen.
    2. That law enforcement agency immediately puts the accused on a plane
    to a foreign prison because non-citizens don't have the right to due
    process.

    But maybe never in the history of the United States has a citizen ever
    been accused of being a non-citizen, who can know.



    --
    Add xx to reply

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Thu Jun 12 13:24:45 2025
    On 6/12/2025 12:31 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Mon Jun 9 15:36:33 2025 Shadow wrote:
    On Mon, 09 Jun 2025 18:10:07 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
    wrote:


    Garcia is NOT a citizen and was brought back to answer crimnal charges of interstate transport of illegal aliens over a LONG period. There is no protection from those sorts of charges.

    He worked in construction and drove his colleagues to work.
    There is no mention if they were legal or not. If they were illegal,
    it's strange the company that employed them was not fined.

    He was fined once for driving with an expired license.

    I really don't think driving with an expired license is more
    serious than being a gang member(and possibly a drug
    trafficker/murderer). That's reason they said he was sent to jail
    without due process.
    Yet they said they brought him back to try him for "more
    serious crimes"(the expired driver's license).




    Expired driver's license? Exactly why you left wind extremist claims? He was brought back to stand trial for interstate transportation of illegal aliens and every state line crossed between Texas and Tennesee he could be charged with the same crime
    though he hasn't been and will simply cop a plea and get 15 months

    "For count one, conspiracy to transport aliens, the maximum penalty is a fine, imprisonment for not more than 10 years or both.
    For count two, unlawful transportation of undocumented aliens, the maximum term of imprisonment is five years, unless the offense was committed for "commercial advantage or private financial gain," in which case the maximum term of imprisonment is 10
    years. The indictment alleges Abrego Garcia transported undocumented people for private financial gain, meaning he would be subject to a maximum of 10 years in prison if he is convicted as he is charged"


    What's the Statute of Limitations on that? How available
    and reliable are witnesses three years later?

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Thu Jun 12 13:32:12 2025
    On 6/12/2025 12:54 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Mon Jun 9 20:38:35 2025 AMuzi wrote:

    I usually do not but this morning I gave it my best.
    To no avail.

    p.s. Mr Kunich often begins with a true minuscule factoid
    before launching off into outer space, crystals and
    hallucinati9ns, all mixed.





    Actually, I got the Trump approval of the illegals deportation of 60% mixed up with the percentage of deaths from mRNA vaccines of 74%.

    But weren't you arguing that Tom Ritchie built Jobst's frame when people that were actually there said that Peter Rich did it? Perhaps you should tone down the launching into outer space rhetoric.

    That's not right. I know Mr Ritchey and I knew Mr Rich. But
    hey don't take my word, ring up Tom Ritchey; it's a local
    call for you.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Sun Jun 15 09:39:17 2025
    On 6/14/2025 3:33 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Sat Jun 7 07:59:22 2025 zen cycle wrote:
    On 6/6/2025 10:38 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
    On 6/6/2025 2:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
    On 6/6/2025 1:38 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:

    Wow... You have no Real ID indication on your driver's licence? Do
    you even know what it is?

    Like most USAians, Mr Krygowski and I know what it is and do not have
    it. I don't know his reason, but for me, why ever would I? meh.

    When I last renewed my license, they asked if I wanted Real ID. I learned: >>>
    1) I could travel without it by carrying my passport. And I'd need a
    passport for international travel anyway.

    2) I'd have to run home to fetch things like my passport, my birth
    certificate, my social security card, something like a utility bill
    addressed to me at home. And start over at the back of the line.

    For what? So I don't have to carry my passport when I get on a plane?

    A person who didn't provide similar documentation probably doesn't have
    a Real ID, no matter what he thinks.

    https://www.flhsmv.gov/driver-licenses-id-cards/what-to-bring/u-s-citizen/ >>>.


    But hey, ignorance is bliss.


    And the right wingers went ballistic when Hillary Clinton suggested a
    federally issue ID card.....




    References please.

    That actually did happen in 1993.
    And it was not the only instance: https://calmatters.org/california-divide/2023/01/drivers-licenses-undocumented-immigrants/

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Sun Jun 15 09:43:12 2025
    On 6/14/2025 3:44 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Fri Jun 6 14:38:26 2025 Catrike Ryder wrote:
    On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 13:55:36 -0400, Frank Krygowski
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 6/6/2025 8:57 AM, AMuzi wrote:

    I think we all agree that a finding of fact is necessary and proper. (a >>>> finding of fact is not the same as a trial)

    That said, who habitually? carries a certified copy of a birth
    certificate?? No one I know at least.

    Agreed. For my recent trip to California I had no "Real ID" so I used my >>> passport. But I'll confess to feeling nervous carrying that thing even
    around the airport. There's certain documentation one would not want to
    lose or misplace.

    Wow... You have no Real ID indication on your driver's licence? Do
    you even know what it is?




    I believe that only 11 states are presently issuing Real ID. My DL has a star up in the corner but this being California, I don't think it means anything.

    50 States, plus territories:
    https://www.tsa.gov/real-id

    Star? California license should have a bear instead: https://www.keesingtechnologies.com/document-verification/real-id/

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Sun Jun 22 09:09:35 2025
    On 6/21/2025 6:06 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Sun Jun 8 21:18:39 2025 Shadow wrote:
    On Sat, 07 Jun 2025 23:13:33 GMT, cyclintom <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    On Wed Jun 4 19:08:36 2025 Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <[email protected]>,
    Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
    US citizens should indeed get a hearing.

    So if the government says you're not a US citizen (even if you are), you >>>> don't get a hearing. This is a planet-sized loophole, you see?




    Where do you get the idea that you don't get a hearing?

    According to Trump, you don't get a hearing. Deportation is
    automatic. No checking documents, no courts, no right of defense.
    NOW do you understand ?




    If you have proof that you are a citizen, you do not NEED to go to court, it is against the law to deport you from your native country.

    NOW do you understand?

    Trump is NOT picking up people off of the street and deporting them. People charged as illegals and verified by USCIS are turned over to ICE and deported. What does Brazil do with the Argentinians flooding the country?

    Brasil has had net emiragtion for years.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Tue Jul 1 07:36:04 2025
    On 6/30/2025 12:51 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Wed Jun 4 16:52:22 2025 AMuzi wrote:
    On 6/4/2025 2:53 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
    On 6/4/2025 9:43 AM, AMuzi wrote:
    On 6/4/2025 4:30 AM, zen cycle wrote:
    On 6/3/2025 5:03 PM, AMuzi wrote:
    On 6/3/2025 3:10 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
    On 6/3/2025 11:36 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
    On 6/3/2025 8:59 AM, AMuzi wrote:

    There was a false statement inserted into a filing in
    re Kilmar Abrego Garcia that he had been deported in
    error. The Justice Department employee who added that
    was fired the next morning and the filing emended...

    Got a citation or other evidence for that claim? And
    what did the courts say about this issue? And where is
    Mr. Garcia now?

    Right, The government narrative kept changing, coming
    up with different excuses, right down to trump
    retweeting a photo shopped (fake) image of Mr. Garcia
    with gang tattoos. Once they were unable to convince
    anyone with any brains that he had no criminal past,
    they brought out a domestic abuse complaint from ten
    years ago - complete bullshit as well.


    As Monday morning's NYT for example, whose front page
    did not cover the immolation of live US citizens,
    including a Holocaust survivor, in Boulder by an
    illegal jihadi screaming 'free palestine.' Deemed not
    interesting enough by editorial staff.

    I don't get a print edition of NYT; but your complaint
    seems to be that eight people getting various degrees
    of burns did not get enough attention, despite it
    being on every news outlet. It looks to me like NYT
    has since done many articles on the incident and its
    implications. Are you trying to say NYT does
    sufficiently protest antisemitism?

    And BTW, what happened was despicable. As you know,
    I'm firmly against attempts to harm or kill groups of
    innocent people. But "immolation of live US citizens"
    is more than a little exaggerated. It usually means
    burning to death. I gather only one person out of the
    eight was seriously burned.

    There's no excuse for the attack, but you can slightly
    relax your grip on your own pearls!



    At his previous 2019 hearing, after his deportation
    order, the removal was stayed as the judge found that
    his MS-13 gang membership put him at risk in his old
    neighborhood controlled by a competing gang.

    (details are messy as he had lived both in El Salvador
    and in Guatemala)

    https://tennesseestar.com/news/immigration-judges-2019-
    order-found- kilmar-abrego-garcia-subject-to-removal-by-
    deportation-but-granted- withholding-of-removal-to-
    guatemala-though-referencing-el-salvador/
    tpappert/2025/04/22/

    The prior administration also denied assistance to
    Tennessee State Patrol in 2022 when they stopped him in
    the car of a known trafficker with a load of smuggled
    illegals while speeding with no valid license. FBI
    directed TSP to not detain him.

    https://tennesseestar.com/justice/tennessee-highway-
    patrol-confirms- biden-era-fbi-told-officers-to-release-
    kilmar-abrego-garcia- during-2022- traffic-stop-despite-
    speeding-and-license-violations- to/ tpappert/2025/04/17/

    Uncorroborated allegations.."sources said"...."two
    (unnamed) judges determined he is likely to be a member
    of the Central American gang, Mara Salvatrucha"....iow,
    more trump ICE/DOJ lies to cover their assess.


    The judge who, in 2019, stayed deportation to Guatemala
    _due to his gang affiliation_ wrote his decision. It was
    not appealed.


    Got a link? I couldn't find anything except trump DOJ heresay.


    Cited above, it's in the header of the first link, "granted
    withholding of removal to guatemala though referencing el
    salvador"




    Don't you find it interesting the sort of people he wishes to put Americans around?


    My comment above was not entirely accurate. And it was
    nearly a month ago! Mr Zen clarified the complex and
    convoluted actual judge's written disposition.

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Tue Jul 1 07:59:45 2025
    On 6/30/2025 2:01 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Sun Jun 8 21:14:54 2025 Shadow wrote:
    On Sat, 07 Jun 2025 16:32:54 -0400, Catrike Ryder
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Sat, 07 Jun 2025 09:48:55 -0300, Shadow <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Fri, 06 Jun 2025 14:48:47 -0400, Catrike Ryder
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    I did
    fly several times during that period and I soon realised that the crew >>>>> didn't make an issue about lowering the mask below my chin. I walked >>>>> around in three airports with the mask hanging around my neck

    I suppose we'll never know how many people you killed... not
    that you would lose a minute's sleep if it had been dozens.
    []'s

    Don't be silly... How would I have killed anyone?

    To deliberately infect someone with a disease is manslaughter
    here in Brazil, if the victim dies.
    Probably not so in the US, or most repuglicans would be in
    jail.




    OK, proof positive that you aren't an MD and never were.


    You have an unhealthy fixation with other people's
    qualifications. What's the point? Can't you just take a
    man's word for things which affect you not at all?

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to cyclintom on Mon Jul 7 14:27:45 2025
    On 7/7/2025 2:07 PM, cyclintom wrote:
    On Mon Jul 7 12:42:07 2025 Rolf Mantel wrote:

    There's "zero detriment" only for people who regularly use guns anyways.
    If a rookie sees the need to carry a gun for cycling, they first have to
    buy a gun (which implies filling the paperwork needed, which implies
    getting the necessary licences if needed). Then they have to spend lots
    of hours training to use a gun which they might prefer spending on
    bicycling.




    In most states here there is no paperwork to buy a gun. We have the 2nd Amendment.

    Well, yes. And them there's California...

    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AMuzi@21:1/5 to Beej Jorgensen on Mon Jul 14 19:29:18 2025
    On 7/14/2025 5:45 PM, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <twddQ.332972$[email protected]>,
    cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
    Brian, you're quite right. But they STILL voted for him over a
    Republican.

    They voted for him over Trump. There are a lot of people like me who,
    when Trump said it was allowable to terminate the articles of the Constitution, decided the man wasn't fit to be President of the United
    States since that's a direct contradiction to his oath of office. Not to mention a seriously offensive thing to say to all Americans.

    So from my perspective, I'd have voted for a wet bag of rocks before
    Trump, since the wet bag of rocks has more respect for the Constitution
    than he does.

    And they looked the other way at election fraud so flagrant that it
    takes people like Flunky to claim "there was not proof".

    Trump made me extremely confident with his 60+ court cases that there
    was no fraud. That was a lot of thorough investigation, maybe more than
    has happened in any other election.

    You'll never find a stronger proponent for legitimate and complete
    elections than myself, and I encouraged all those court cases. If there
    was something there, I wanted to know about it. And after all that, they failed to show fraud despite having so-called mountains of evidence.


    Of those 60 cases, all dismissed or resolved on procedural
    issues, was there one in which any evidence or testimony was
    entered into the court record? If there was one, I missed it.

    The most blatant was Pennsylvania, where unauthorized
    officials made drastic changes to PA election law just
    before the election of 2020, in direct violation of the
    Constitution:

    "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature
    thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole
    Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State
    may be entitled in the Congress..."

    https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-2/section-1/

    which gives the State Legislature the exclusive and plenary
    power over elections. The Legislature filed suit promptly
    but the court dismissed on latches, noting no injury had
    been inflicted since the election had yet to be held.

    The day after the election, the Legislature filed again. The
    PA courts dismissed again on latches, as the election had
    been held already and so no remedy was possible.



    --
    Andrew Muzi
    [email protected]
    Open every day since 1 April, 1971

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From zen cycle@21:1/5 to Beej Jorgensen on Tue Jul 15 05:36:48 2025
    On 7/14/2025 6:45 PM, Beej Jorgensen wrote:
    In article <twddQ.332972$[email protected]>,
    cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
    Brian, you're quite right. But they STILL voted for him over a
    Republican.

    They voted for him over Trump. There are a lot of people like me who,
    when Trump said it was allowable to terminate the articles of the Constitution, decided the man wasn't fit to be President of the United
    States since that's a direct contradiction to his oath of office. Not to mention a seriously offensive thing to say to all Americans.

    So from my perspective, I'd have voted for a wet bag of rocks before
    Trump, since the wet bag of rocks has more respect for the Constitution
    than he does.

    And they looked the other way at election fraud so flagrant that it
    takes people like Flunky to claim "there was not proof".

    Trump made me extremely confident with his 60+ court cases that there
    was no fraud. That was a lot of thorough investigation, maybe more than
    has happened in any other election.

    You'll never find a stronger proponent for legitimate and complete
    elections than myself, and I encouraged all those court cases. If there
    was something there, I wanted to know about it. And after all that, they failed to show fraud despite having so-called mountains of evidence.


    +1

    Well Said, Mr. Jorgensen

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)