Connect with us

News

‘Dystopian’: Miller Makes ‘Outrageous’ Claim as El Salvador Refuses to Return US Resident

Published

on

Backing up the Trump administration, the President of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, says he has no intention or ability to return an unlawfully removed Maryland legal resident, Kilmar Abrego García, to the United States. Abrego García was wrongly deported to a notorious maximum security “mega-prison” for terrorists in El Salvador.

“How can I return him to the United States?” President Bukele said to reporters on Monday, during a meeting with President Donald Trump and his top officials in the Oval Office, as reported by The Washington Post. “I smuggle him into the United States? Of course I’m not going to do it.”

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court in an apparent unanimous opinion ordered the Trump administration to “facilitate” the return of Abrego García to the United States.

Minutes before President Bukele’s remarks, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller, on-camera in the Oval Office, delivered what is being called an “outrageous misinterpretation” of the Supreme Court’s opinion, which was quickly condemned.

READ MORE: Trump Rages Against Critics, All But Silent on Alleged Terror Attack on Dem Governor

“I promise you, if he was your neighbor, you would move right away,” Miller, who was the architect of the first Trump administration’s child separation policy, told reporters.

“What was the ruling in the Supreme Court, Steve, was it nine to nothing?” President Trump interjected.

“Yes, it was a 9-0, in our favor,” Miller wrongly claimed. “against the district court ruling, saying that no district court has the power to compel the foreign policy function of the United States.”

“As Pam said,” Miller continued, referring to Attorney General Pam Bondi, “the ruling solely stated that if this individual—at El Salvador’s sole discretion—was sent back to our country, that we could deport him a second time.”

“No version of this legally ends up with him ever living here, because he is a citizen of El Salvador,” Miller claimed, before pointing reporters to Bukele.

“That is the president of El Salvador. Your questions about it per the court can only be directed to him,” said Miller.

Attorney Michael Kasdan responded to Miller’s remarks: “We have reached the point where the White House openly lies on television about what a unanimous Supreme Court ruling against them says. The stuff of dystopian novels.”

“This is a blatant lie. The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 AGAINST Trump,” wrote the progressive nonprofit People For the American Way.

READ MORE: ‘Apocalyptic’: Trump Plan Would Be ‘Science Demolition Derby’ Experts Warn

“This is deeply Orwellian. The Court ruled against the Trump administration 9-0,” observed the MeidasTouch Network.

Conservative legal activist and political commentator Ed Whelan, who clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, weighed in.

“Outrageous misrepresentation of Supreme Court ruling,” Whelan declared, serving up a somewhat technical legal analysis. “The unanimous Court ruled that the district-court order ‘properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.’ Yes, the Court also stated that the “intended scope of the term ‘effectuate’ in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority,” and it told the district court to ‘clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.’ But: (1) ‘due regard’ doesn’t mean that the district court couldn’t give any teeth to ‘effectuate’; (2) in any event, the district court dropped ‘effectuate’ from its revised order, so this is all irrelevant. Duty to ‘facilitate’ continues.”

Commenting on the video, immigration attorney Allen Orr Jr. Esq. wrote: “When you tell yourself the story you want to believe even when it is fiction.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Beyond Contemptuous’: DOJ Slammed for ‘Sheer Indignation’ in Defying Judge

 

 Image via Reuters

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Ethics Committee Reveals Latest Republican to Come Under Review: Report

Published

on

The House Ethics Committee has reportedly announced that U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) is facing a review by the Office of Congressional Conduct.

The origin of the review was not been disclosed. Under committee rules, officials are prohibited from stating whether the matter constitutes a formal investigation or identifying its underlying cause. The Committee only stated that there is a “matter regarding Representative Nancy Mace.”

“The Committee notes that the mere fact of a referral or an extension, and the mandatory disclosure of such an extension and the name of the subject of the matter, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or reflect any judgment on behalf of the Committee,” the Ethics Committee statement reads. It was posted to social media by congressional journalist Jamie Dupree.

The statement also says the committee will “announce its course of action in this matter on or before March 2, 2026.”

Congresswoman Mace is currently running for governor of South Carolina.

Earlier this month Mace warned that Republicans may lose control of the House, saying they have not “done enough” and could “do a lot more” to implement President Donald Trump’s agenda, The Hill reported.

 

Image via Shutterstock 

Continue Reading

News

Republican Vows to Block Trump’s Greenland Push

Published

on

A prominent Republican lawmaker is vowing to thwart any attempt by President Donald Trump to acquire Greenland through force or financial means.

Speaking from Copenhagen as part of a bipartisan delegation of U.S. congressional lawmakers, U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), told reporters it is “an important message for the people of the Kingdom of Denmark to understand” that the United States has “three separate but equal branches” of government.

Reminding them that under the U.S. Constitution it is Congress that controls spending, Senator Murkowski, who has broken ranks and stood up to President Trump at times, said, “In Congress, we have tools at our disposal under our constitutional authority that speaks specifically to the power of the purse through appropriations.”

She noted also that “Congress has a role. Certainly, when it comes to spending authorities, the Congress has a role in basically helping to facilitate the message that comes from our constituents, to be reflected in whether it’s legislation or appropriations, or actions or measures, that can indicate, again, the will of the Congress.”

READ MORE: Trump Dangles Another Insurrection Act Threat for Minnesota

The “vast majority” of Americans do not support the acquisition of Greenland, Senator Murkowski added, noting that “some 75 percent will say we do not think that that is a good idea.”

“Greenland needs to be viewed as our ally, not as an asset,” Murkowski also told reporters.

Politico reported that U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) “also took part in the visit by House and Senate lawmakers,” and “said he would push ahead with legislation to curb Trump’s power to act unilaterally.”

He also denied President Trump’s claims that Greenland is necessary to be owned by the U.S. for national security reasons.

“Are there real, pressing threats to the security of Greenland from China and Russia?” Coons said. “No, not today.”

READ MORE: With Shutdown Looming and Crises Growing Trump Heads Off for Long Mar-a-Lago Weekend

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Dangles Another Insurrection Act Threat for Minnesota

Published

on

Just one day after threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act in Minnesota, which would allow him to unleash domestic military forces onto American streets, President Donald Trump once again on Friday hinted he would do so while suggesting he may be “forced” to take action.

Trump targeted Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, both Democrats, claiming they “don’t know what to do” after he deployed roughly 3,000 federal troops to the city.

“In Minnesota,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, “the Troublemakers, Agitators, and Insurrectionists are, in many cases, highly paid professionals.”

“The Governor and Mayor don’t know what to do, they have totally lost control, and our currently being rendered, USELESS! If, and when, I am forced to act, it will be solved, QUICKLY and EFFECTIVELY!”

The Guardian labeled Trump’s claims that protesters are paid as baseless.

Attorney Aaron Reichlin-Melnick wrote: “Note that the Trump admin hasn’t yet been able to produce evidence of a SINGLE ‘paid protestor.’ They’ve had total control of the FBI and the DOJ and ICE HSI and yet despite all of that, they can’t even find ONE person who they can accuse of being paid to protest.”

Separately, The Steady State, a group of over 365 former national security officials, while not referring to Trump’s remarks from Friday morning, noted that the Insurrection Act is “an extraordinary power meant for true emergencies, not a shield for unconstitutional policing. Using it to silence dissent or justify unlawful paramilitary activity at the hand of ICE undermines the rule of law.”

READ MORE: With Shutdown Looming and Crises Growing Trump Heads Off for Long Mar-a-Lago Weekend

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.