Ugh, I'm getting the bad feeling that the poor guy is dead.
At this point I'd be demanding proof that he's still alive and well.
this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
199 points (98.5% liked)
politics
23035 readers
4250 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
No one is certain, but yeah, he's most likely dead. They threw him in with gang members that he immigrated to the US to escape. And naturally, US media blasted that fact 24/7. He probably died in the first few days.
This feels like the obvious answer. Likely why they "couldn't do anything"
Te be fair, it's not much of a concentration camp if people are just going to be alive in there all the time. /s
I laugh at your comment, but then I cry because of the situation.
I’ll say it: dudes probably already six feet under.
Probably just two if we're being honest.
2 might be generous
Why would he expect any different; that 'prison' has never permitted any visitors, gifts, mail, nor has it ever released a live prisoner.
US Senators generally get what they want with these types of things, especially when they visit in person. They're direct representatives of the Legislative Branch of the US government, and have as much, if not more control than the Executive Branch (when they are actually doing their job).
Telling a Senator no, in person, generally isn't something you do unless you don't have another choice. Like if the person they want to talk to is actually dead but you have been saying they're alive.
I mean, I don't totally disagree here, but I'm not sure what kind of clout that's supposed to hold under team Trump.
Like, understanding this isn't a perfect analogy, if I were working in an American prison holding a Russian prisoner and a Putin-aligned legislator wanted to see that prisoner I would take great pleasure in telling them to fuck off if I had that power.
The difference would be that presumably we'd be holding that prisoner despite Russians wishes not because of them. We paid for them (are paying?) to hold this guy. He's not their prisoner, he's ours. The whole situation is fucked but that analogy isn't quite accurate.
I made it on the fly, but the point is that the clout goes away when 1) you're not my senator, 2) you're not a legislator in my country and 3) you go against everything I stand for - what kind of clout am I supposed to feel from someone like that?
It should be fairly normal to decline a random politician from another country a request no one else gets.
It reeks a bit of American exceptionalism that US senators should get special rights. If a random politician from, say, the Netherlands asked to see someone held in Guantanamo Bay the US will do fuck all to accommodate this request.
My comment is not a justification for the deportation of that guy by the way. I just don't think it should be notable, as random politicians usually enjoy much, much fewer rights than head of states.
I mean... I don't think it's exceptional for an American politician to want to see a prison setup for American detainees.
I can't reason why you would make this comment, I have to assume no logic was used. How about the fact that ICE admitted that the man was deported in error, is that enough justification? Your comparison makes no sense because it assumes the man is being imprisoned for just cause. The Maryland man was a constituent of the Maryland senator.
I'm tired of the whataboutism bullshit rhetoric.
It assumes the man is being imprisoned for just cause
Guantanamo Bay doesn't rely on any cause though? It's literally a US torture camp where nothing matters. No due process, no just cause, no nothing. It's worse than CECOT in everything but scale.
Have you ever seen any country's opposition figure successfully demand something from another country? I personally haven't. Usually the government alone controls any and all foreign relations.
Hell, Israel has literally detained and deported two British MPs on a parliamentary delegation - not just a visit. And they're part of the governing party, no less!
It's genuinely not surprising that El Salvador reacts this way. It's the literal default reaction to a nongovernmental politician demanding something.
And yes, I think it's appalling that the I US deports anyone and everyone, legally or otherwise. This doesn't affect El Salvador though since they detain whoever the US sends there. The US argues this man is a terrorist, therefore this is sufficient justification for them.
Had Britain started deporting migrants to Rwanda and a MP from the Green Party requested to visit someone "mistakenly" deported, they would've been denied access as well.
I just really don't think there's anything noteworthy in the rejection alone.
I don't know what the point is that you're making. No one is saying this is something that's new, but the example you used, Guantanamo Bay has like 15 prisoners now? Are you saying this should be regarded as commonplace?
They allowed kristi noem to visit.
But she's a puppy killer so she's OK and in tbe same side as the people driving the Deportations.
Update: Sen Van Hollen stuck around and fought for it, and in the end was able to meet with him: