The Curious Case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia (Part 2)

[Samm]

@biggestal99

@Samm

I do. What makes you think otherwise?

your comments about this case. duh.

Be specific. I have made many comments.

[peek-a-boo]

@WorldWatcher

And here is what the agreed to as a factual matter.

Out of almost 100 complaint paragraphs, why is that specific point relevant? The administration has never admitted otherwise. I find what has been widely disputed on this board to be more relevant. Paragraph 65 regarding the payment to incarcerate Garcia was denied.

[peek-a-boo]

@WuWei

“Nuh uh” doesn’t work in court.

Complainant made a claim and the defendant denied it. The next move is up to the complainant. That’s exactly how those things work. If they have evidence showing payment, they would then be expected to provide it. The defendant is under no obligation to prove they didn’t provide payment.

As to demanding to see an agreement, the defendant could rightfully claim there was no agreement for Garcia to see. He was simply deported in error, as already admitted.

[WorldWatcher]

@peek-a-boo

@WorldWatcher

And here is what the agreed to as a factual matter.

Out of almost 100 complaint paragraphs, why is that specific point relevant? The administration has never admitted otherwise. I find what has been widely disputed on this board to be more relevant. Paragraph 65 regarding the payment to incarcerate Garcia was denied.

Two reasons…

#1 It’s the government formally acknowledging that Abrego Garcia was not here illegally when he was apprehended and deported and that was under withholding order from a judge.

#2 Is the government admitted they didn’t properly get the judges 2019 order properly reversed to lift the deportation order.

WW

[WorldWatcher]

@peek-a-boo

@WuWei

“Nuh uh” doesn’t work in court.

Complainant made a claim and the defendant denied it. The next move is up to the complainant. That’s exactly how those things work. If they have evidence showing payment, they would then be expected to provide it. The defendant is under no obligation to prove they didn’t provide payment.

As to demanding to see an agreement, the defendant could rightfully claim there was no agreement for Garcia to see. He was simply deported in error, as already admitted.

So the government can claim there is a formal agreement, repeatedly both in court and public statements.

Then when ordered by the court to provide this written agreement simply say “oh, we don’t have one, just kidding”.

And that is supposed to be accepted by the courts?

Judge: “Summary judgment for the claimant.” [Then bang the gavel.]

WW

[peek-a-boo]

@WorldWatcher

Two reasons…

#1 It’s the government formally acknowledging that Abrego Garcia was not here illegally when he was apprehended and deported and that was under withholding order from a judge.

They acknowledged no such thing.

#2 Is the government admitted they didn’t properly get the judges 2019 order properly reversed to lift the deportation order.

WW

As in mistaken deportation to ES. Nothing new here.

[peek-a-boo]

@WorldWatcher

So the government can claim there is a formal agreement, repeatedly both in court and public statements.

Then when ordered by the court to provide this written agreement simply say “oh, we don’t have one, just kidding”.

And that is supposed to be accepted by the courts?

Judge: “Summary judgment for the claimant.” [Then bang the gavel.]

WW

For TdA gang members, not for Garcia.

[WuWei]

Nope.

[peek-a-boo]

@WuWei

Nope.

Feel free to elaborate.

[WuWei]

See how it works?

[WuWei]

@peek-a-boo

@WuWei

Now Trump Inc says the judge who ordered his return by Monday has no authority to issue such an order.

The judge will look pretty foolish when CECOT tells him to go pound sand.

Aged like milk in the July sun.

[WuWei]

I wonder if Abrego is going to use the allegations of torture by the other Venezuelans in any of his trials.

[Camp]

If not it will be in the blockbuster movie due out next summer.

[WuWei]

I’ll pay for view.

[Dorsalfinsky]

@Camp

If not it will be in the blockbuster movie due out next summer.

I hope they get Benedict Cumberbatch. I like him.

[peek-a-boo]

@WuWei

I wonder if Abrego is going to use the allegations of torture by the other Venezuelans in any of his trials.

Whether or not he was tortured in CECOT has no relevance to his human smuggling trial. Prosecution will strongly object if it is brought up by the defense and the judge would likely sustain any objections. I doubt the defense would be stupid enough to try and bring it up.

[WuWei]

Shoe in for certain now.

[peek-a-boo]

@WuWei

Shoe in for certain now.

How is it even remotely relevant to whether or not Garcia engaged in human trafficking?

[Steel-W0LF]

@WorldWatcher

@peek-a-boo

@WorldWatcher

There is an awful lot of DOJ admitting to claims by the claimant, and a whole lot of Sgt. Shultz “we know nothing”.

But what I do find interesting is the images below. Remember this is the DOJ speaking…

WW

I’ve had a chance to review the defendant’s answers to the complaint filed in document 1.

For the most part the admissions were to known facts. For instance, Pam Bondi is attorney general. They denied pretty much everything in the complaint, resorting to the “we know nothing” when complaint made references to conjecture. For instance, Garcia’s children. The complainant made statements regarding the children. The defendant wasn’t obligated to verify any of the information and instead chose to say they had no knowledge.

One of my major takeaway’s was the denial of paragraph 65, where complainant claims the US was paying for the incarceration of Garcia.

And here is what the agreed to as a factual matter.

WW
.
.
.

.
.

Please show me in the Withholding of Removal order where it says he can’t be sent home to El Salvador.

I’ll wait.

[biggestal99]

@peek-a-boo

Whether or not he was tortured in CECOT has no relevance to his human smuggling trial.

makes him look better to a jury.

oh the poor guy…….

Allan