I'm raising the alarm on this one. The blatant disregard for justice and human rights is, without a doubt, a clear sign of what's to come. Conservatives will try and guise this as an attempt to restore order to the country or something equally ridiculous, but the reality is obvious. This is the next stage of Trump's attempted genocide of innocent people in this country. You may not take that sentence seriously now, but nothing suggests that Trump has any intention of stopping here. Republicans seem content in reducing immigrants to insects that ought to be exterminated rather than the good people that they are. If you lack empathy, then you must at least concede that this is a gross violation of due process. If we don't stop him now, immigrants will not be the only group of people in this country that will have their rights stripped away.
fukcParents (April 18, 2025, 3:36 p.m.)
But he came to ameritkk a illegally so he wuz sent bak to his contry of origin. Their sis a lack of dure process in Elsalvador whos government empriason him on allegations we produced and they didn't follow up to prove this. What are you arguing here, that the politics in el salvador wwith its history of gang violence with its president that has a 90% approval rating because he did what others before him were to scared to do shouldn;t be follwoing through on his promisices and sshould be less authoritarian., Trueth ebe told if you're in amerika eiilegally you're in violation of US law and subject to deportation what about that suggests his intentions are other than exactly that. ur jumping to conclusions faster than my mom and my sister does. You can talk about how sad stiff like this is but mistakes happen, upon suspicion of a crime you're detained the smae thing works when you pull over for speeding youre not free to leave until (arrested)cited or warned. theres probable cause to believe hes in a gang via information and i see tha parrallels to stalin and tha goologs here ironically elsalvador was historically the very same way. however the differncce is that he is violating a crim and thats treesspassing into the unitedd states and hes subject to deportation your critique shoeld be on elsalvadoor and not Tzar Trump unfortunately. Your comments are emontial, irresponsivle, and uneducated I hav higher standardes for the admine for popsock.xyz please be more better.
Jackson (April 18, 2025, 7:32 p.m.)
Had you of taken just 10 minutes out of your woefully uninformed life to actually watch the video relevent to my post, you know it addresses everything you've said here. But since appearently you have no respect for truth, I'll do my best to explain why you're an idiot.
First of all, illegal immigrants do, in fact, have rights and protections under the Constitution. Garcia was entitled to a trial, yet he was determined a criminal without one. He had been (under the authorization of the United States government) been living in the United States as what essentially counts as an asylum seeker. He was being protected under United States federal law from deportation, and yet this administration decided to deport him anyways. You, and many others, claim justification under the consideration that he was supposedly a violent gang member, which, again, not only was determined without due process but seemingly without any credible evidence as well. By all reasonable moral standards, Garcia is an innocent man
This is not to mention El Salvador's president Nayib Bukele, whom is accused of human and civil rights violations, in case you were wondering how he managed to achieve such a high "approval" rating. He serves as an appriopriate guide to what I presume Trump has the intention of carrying out here in the United States: the mass imprisonment of innocent civilians and the destruction of civil rights and due process. Bukele's insistence that Garcia not be freed is a blatant attempt at silencing anyone who many pose a threat to his or Trump's authortarian movements.
So please, in the intended spirit of this website, please do some thinking before your next comment.
fukcParents (April 19, 2025, 3:07 a.m.)
You used a keyword there "was", it is true he "was" being protected. In any case he "is" no longer being protected by the administration that chose to not address the issue of "illegal" immigration. Sure, he was detained on suspicion of being a violent gang member but was found guilty of treading unlawfully on U.S. soil and swiftly deported to his "country of origin" where he was denied due process and imprisoned. Lets be clear the Constitution does provide certain rights to non-citizens, but it also empowers the federal government to enforce immigration laws. The reality is Trump, despite all the morally questionable ideas is still operating within the bounds of the constitution. The framework may be distasteful, but lawful. Garcia isn't an innocent man he broke the law, his punishment deportation and the fascistic leader (if you want to call him that) of his country of origin put him in prison unjustly. It is not the responsibility of the United States to control the international affairs of sovereign nations once deportation has occurred. You can call it harsh or morally wrong, but what you shouldn't do is reduce a complex situation into a narrative where every deportation is a hate crime, and every illegal immigrant is a saint. It's not as simple as "he's a victim of oppression and innocent" Garcia's deportation is legally justifiable and reveals broader international human rights concerns. Ipso facto, this shouldn't be about denying that Garcia broke the law. You should recognize that there can be multiple truths that exist where someone can break the law and be treated unjustly, or a policy can be legal while also being inhumane. Reducing this conversation to pure victim hood or villainy might make for a louder argument, but it makes for a weaker one. If you're genuinely interested in justice, then you should be willing to hold two ideas at once Garcia broke the law, and that what happened to him afterward may still be wrong. It's not about defending him it's about defending consistency, principle, and basic human decency. Putting blinders on and ignoring the nuance might be convenient, but it shuts down any discourse that could actually be productive. If your instinct when faced with disagreement is to open with insults and personal attacks, don't lecture anyone about "respect for truth." That's not discourse. That's ego.