Abrego García Story

~ Clarissa

I don’t understand this whole story at all. Did Abrego García enter the US illegally? Is he a citizen of El Salvador? Is he now back in his country and under its jurisdiction? Why isn’t it very obvious to everybody that entering a country illegally should constitute more than sufficient grounds for removal from its territory?

Unknown's avatar

Published by Clarissa

44 thoughts on “Abrego García Story”

  1. Hi Clarissa its the 2nd day of the Omer count to remove the av tuma avoda zarah from within the Evil Inclination/Yatzir Ha’Rah within my and my peoples hearts. Another example of Gospel revisionist history which substitute the gospel for the T’NaCH narrative as primary: Luke 19:41-42

    The noun peace does not correctly translate the verb shalom. Shalom stands upon the foundation of trust. Peace reflects ancient Greek philosophical rhetoric; where undefined key terms which require the listeners fuzzy logic to define – these essential undefined terms – like shalom, upon which all later ideas thereafter hang upon.

    Herein defines the classic use of Greek rhetoric by which a person controls and directs the masses. The City of David represents the rule of fair and righteous Judicial common law justice. It has absolutely nothing what so ever to do with the revisionist history of the imaginary physical history of Jesus the imaginary myth Son of God – man.

    “Shalom” carries far more than the modern Western notion of “peace.” In Hebrew, shalom implies completeness, wholeness, harmony, security, and a just, equitable social order rooted in mutual trust; deeply tied to emunah (faith/trust) and mishpat (justice).

    By contrast, the Greek eirēnē—translated into English as “peace”—more passive, & static, whereas shalom utterly dynamic. And when the Gospel of Luke (originally written in Greek) uses eirēnē, translators historically rendered it as “peace” in English, which utterly obscures the Hebrew mindset behind Jesus’ (the Son of God character’s) lament over Jerusalem.

    Greek rhetoric originally employed as a tool for crowd control. Rhetoric sophistry, and later Stoicism or Platonism, deeply shaped and influenced early Christian theology. These systems often pivot on undefined abstractions—”Logos”, “Peace”, “Salvation”, etc.—easily manipulated by rhetoric design, without grounding in lived experience or legal precedent (as Hebrew law absolutely demands).

    Revisionist history and the mythologizing of Son of God Jesus. This aligns with the view that the Gospels understood as a allegorical political theology, where the imaginary mythical character of Son of God “Jesus” represents, not a literal historical figure but a narrative device or archetype for deeper sociopolitical critique—especially of Roman occupation and corrupt legal systems.

    So if we read Luke 19:42 not as a personal lament by a mythological Son of God Jesus, but rather as a legal or prophetic indictment of Jerusalem’s Torah leadership and their collective failure to uphold mishpat (justice) and trust-based shalom, the entire tone and meaning of the text radically shifts, the Torah becomes demoted in priority – cast under the shadow of the Son of God narrative.

    Torah, in point of fact, and not the gospel rhetoric narrative, less about emotion and more about the oath brit alliance, the prophetic mussar which rebukes the leaders of the chosen Cohen nation for their failure, sworn at Sinai, their conscious corruption which pursues opportunistic political power over the righteousness of enforced judicial justice.

    Shalom functions as a legal-communal framework, rather than merely a trick of rhetoric where mood or emotion dominates the direction taken by the blind mob masses. It reflects a system of relationships rooted in fidelity to the oath brit alliance and reciprocal trust (emunah). In that sense, shalom simply not something felt, but something upheld—a real social order built on mishpat (justice) and righteousness (tzedek), as found in the Torah and enforced by judges (shofetim) and prophets (nevi’im).

    When shalom becomes translated into Greek as eirēnē, the foundational juridical content gets lost in abstraction. Eirēnē leans more toward inner tranquility or absence of conflict—passive, internal, de-prioritized obligations to pursue fair compensation to those who suffer damages. Peace reflects a word that fits into a philosophical or imperial religious context, not a oath brit alliance by and through which the Torah defines the term brit; a Sinai commitment לשמה.

    Greek thought, expressed in the new testament purposely neutralizes\whitewashes the legal and relational substance of Hebrew term Shalom, by absorbing Shalom into idealized peace categories. This Greek rhetoric technique then detached the gospels from historical accountability.

    Greek rhetorical systems—especially sophistry and later Platonic-Christian syntheses—weaponized undefined key term peace. Love, for example: later the church authorities turned to Greek agape as its definition. Such critical abstractions create semantic fog, where critical abstract terms, their most essential intent meanings, they float above the replaced Hebrew verbs with meaningless noun names. The Torah defines the verb love as “ownership”. A man does not love that which he does not own. Hence the mitzva of kiddushin requires that the man acquires the Nefesh O’lam Ha’bah soul of his wife – meaning the children produced through this oath alliance brit union.

    Whereas the writers of gospel and new testament narratives, those in power who chose to supplant the TNaCH with their New Testament/Old Testament religious rhetoric, like as did Muhammad’s koran replaced the new testament and the Book of Mormon replacement holy book of Mormon equally deprioritized the T’NaCH and new testament and koran forgeries.

    These replacement holy books seized power, they edit and control the new moral gospel narrative through subtle re-defined definitions. “Salvation,” “grace,” “faith,” Yishmael replaced Yitzak at the Akadah, and even “God” become perverted into malleable terms. Monotheism rapes the 2nd Sinai commandment. Rather than precise sworn oaths which define intent of Judicial common law. The sworn oaths got totally whitewashed from the original T’NaCH prophetic mussar. Swept away in the new creed theologies which define how Man must believe in these New Gods dolled up as the T’NaCH God of Sinai.

    This Greek rhetorical shift, makes room for imperial theology, where obedience to Rome’s version of peace (Pax Romana) wolf in sheep clothing, rebranded as the kosher spiritual obedience, and where Jerusalem’s failure totally ignores judicial justice in the oath sworn Cohen lands of inheritance replaced by theological belief systems in the messiah or strict monotheism.

    This new testament justification for Jerusalem’s destruction consequent to the Jewish revolt in 66CE totally and completely ignores the prophetic mussar of the NaCH which warned of the destruction and exile of both Israel & Judah by the g’lut exile carried out through the Divine agents of both the Assyrian and Babylonian empires within the mussar of the T’NaCH itself.

    Return the Gospel narrative to its roots of Hebrew common law jurisprudence, strip away the Greco-Roman mythologizing that turned the gospel narrative into its own separate religion, into an abstract religion of personal piety and internal peace. This new testament socio-legal drama, with its son of God figure lamenting the collapse of Jerusalem over its failure to recognize the Son of God true messiah. Greek replacements—eirēnē, pistis, charis, logos—introduce semantic drift. That drift allows imperial theology to abstract away historical responsibility, essentially laundering injustice through feel-good metaphysics.

    The Case Luke 19:42 nstead of a legal rebuke grounded in prophetic precedent (like those of Yirmiyahu or Yeshayahu), it’s reframed as a personal emotional lament by a deified character, whose authority derives from myth rather than brit law. It bypasses the system of shofetim and nevi’im who were accountable to the Torah and for the community.

    The gospel narrative replaces the oath sworn dedication to pursue justice within the borders of the chosen Cohen oath brit lands, replaced by a foreign idea of a passive messiah who brings peace to the Goyim people incorporated as part of the chosen Cohen people. This narrative totally ignores the teshuva made by HaShem where on Yom Kippur HaShem annulled the vow to make of Moshe’s seed the chosen Cohen people. This Divine t’shuva utterly rejects the later replacement theologies and holy books with violate the commandment — do not add or subtract from this Torah.

    According to prophetic mussar, neither Babylon nor Rome destroyed Jerusalem. The failure of the chosen oath alliance brit, directly comparable to the sin of the Golden Calf, where the chosen Cohen people fail to obey the terms of the Sinai oath alliance. Herein defines the basis for the destruction of Jerusalem and the g’lut exile of the Jewish people by the Assyrian, Babylonian and Roman empires. And before these g’lut exiles the Egyptian exile, the cruel oppression of Israelite slaves – caused by the betrayal and sale of Yosef by his jealous brothers.

    Like

    Reply

  2. The two best legal analysts writing today are Andrew McCarthy, a former US attorney, who sucessfully prosecuted the “Blind Sheik” for the first WTC bombing, and Jonathan Turley, a Geo. Washington U. law professor. Each have written well about the nuances of this case, which are either willfully distorted (NY Times) or misunderstood, by virtually all the media without a constitutional law background. McCarthy primarily writes for the National Review and Turley for his blog: “Res ipsa loquitur” and a number of national publications.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Yale law professor Jed Rubenfeld has an excellent untangling of exactly what’s going on, and how the media have botched the reporting of this story, which has more legal nuance than either ideology can tolerate, in today’s Free Press: “No, the President has not defied a Supreme Court ruling”.

      Like

      Reply

        1. I love how the press keeps referring to the guy as “mistakenly” deported.

          No, he was “on purpose” deported, for being a criminal member of a criminal organization, in the country completely illegally.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          1. It’s even irrelevant whether he is a member of MS-13. He entered illegally, enough said.

            The press keeps referring to him as “a Maryland Dad”. Lovely and honest, as usual.

            Liked by 2 people

            Reply

            1. Nice of them to rediscover the importance of fatherhood. Does that newfound principle apply universally, or only to criminals?

              This is like the George Floyd thing. There are definitely illegals at risk of being deported, who are probably nice people and we could all legit feel bad for them (even if they are here illegally and should go home and try again using the legal application process).

              But they *never* pick those. They always pick some right criminal bastard and then lie about him, and insist we all believe that person is some kind of saint, and then start yelling “racist” and “fascist” when anybody points out the obvious: that these are not nice people.

              Why?

              Why the obvious lying? There’s no way the people issuing the talking points believe any of that. Do they get a sick thrill out of seeing how many people will parrot the lie? Is it a loyalty test? A cult religious observance?

              Liked by 1 person

              Reply

      2. I’ll have to try that!

        He is good even in English– seemed to be enjoying that whole press op: “We’re not very fond of releasing terrorists into our country…” 😀

        I watched a longer version of it, and laughed so much.

        This is the way. Force the opposition to defend all the really, really, indefensible things they’ve been pushing.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

          1. He entered the country illegally. This is not in dispute. What is there to debate if this is well-known and uncontested? He is now back in his own country and should sue for relief there if that is what he wants. The idea that he should be returned to the US is deeply bizarre.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

            1. These people lurve them some violent gangs.

              Probably because all their men are soft-handed chubby-faced victims of the pharmaceutical-industrial complex. SSRIs lead to dissatisfaction in many areas of life.

              Liked by 1 person

              Reply

              1. A friend in grad school once confessed that his anti-depressant made him impotent. Which made him more depressed. Which meant he needed to ask the doctor to up his meds. I remember being very stumped by this logic.

                Liked by 1 person

          1. Magic words! If we call you bad names, that makes you bad!

            It’s so lovely to see that malign spell stop working.

            Go on, people, please defend importing and protecting terrorists and criminal gang members. Out loud. In public. With your names attached.

            Watching similar things going with voter ID enforcement, blatant fraud in government spending, funding the taliban, trying to legitimize pedos, letting cut-rate men take all the prizes in women’s sports, offshoring jobs at the expense of the working/middle classes, etc. etc. etc.

            The magic words aren’t working anymore. Now they’re just out there obviously defending horrible things in front of everybody. It’s kind of shocking that Fetterman seems to be the only notable Dem who’s figured out that isn’t a good strategy.

            These are sick people.

            Like

            Reply

      1. When he was apprehended, he (according to McCarthy, in a previous essay, very dubiously) claimed he would be subject to persecution if he were returned to El Salvador, his country of origin, and an immigration court judge allowed him only to be deported to any country in the world but El Salvador. This was in 2019, and the Trump Administration failed to appeal this ruling, which remains in place. https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/04/why-the-supreme-court-upheld-the-order-to-return-abrego-garcia-from-el-salvador/

        Like

        Reply

          1. Occam’s razor: Incompetence on the part of Trump’s INS and Justice Department; Glee on the part of the Biden administration which viewed everything through a “will it advance the interests of Fearless Leader?” lens and saw only another potential voter to save “our democracy”.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

              1. Most of the kids around here that left home boomeranged back because rent is too expensive. And you are correct, Carney is more of a WEF corrupt would-be elite than Turdo.,

                o

                Liked by 1 person

              2. That really sucks. I want the very best for Canada. It’s a beautiful, wonderful country. Pollievre is not perfect but he’s a step in the right direction. Carney is not. I’m so hopeful he’ll lose. He’s the second coming of Keith Starmer, weak, vapid, and mega liberal.

                Like

  6. They used executive powers to import tens of millions of illegals with no due process and now want to the government to do CSI-level due diligence on every deportation case, with hundreds of lawyers and judges expected to pore over every minute detail of every scamming migrant before sending them back. Fuck that!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. They want jury trials for every single deportation case. That’s not how it works.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. I think it likely the whole strategy there was to import so many that there would be no way to *do* the legal due process. You’d have to hire more people than the country has, just to staff the hearings and file the paperwork.

        Once you get to that point, you can be like: oh, we’ll never be able to process all these people through normal channels… time to issue a general amnesty!

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. The left is great at this general strategy. Media institutions like NYTimes sheepishly admit now that they were wrong about Covid (and Biden dementia, and immigration, and the economy, etc. etc.). And SNL, their cultural arm, will even joke about it. But it’s always after the damage is done and they’re 100% sure that nothing can be done about it.

          From the show Yes Minister:

          Stage 1: Nothing’s going to happen.

          Stage 2: Something may be going to happen but we should do nothing about it.

          Stage 3: Maybe we should do something about it, but there’s nothing we can do.

          Stage 4: Maybe there was something we could’ve done, but it’s too late now.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

          1. I thought the propaganda during Trump’s first administration was insane. But the volume and the intensity have increased this time around. Every day I have to reassure my very unwell mother in Canada that we are very much OK, life is good, and no civil war is happening.

            Like

            Reply

      2. The whole legal system is on pause. The SCOTUS is involved. Yet we all know that the guy entered illegally. The insanity of this boggles the mind.

        Like

        Reply

  7. Stringer Bell: “They used executive powers to import tens of millions of illegals with no due process”

    methylethyl: “I think it likely the whole strategy there was to import so many that there would be no way to *do* the legal due process”

    Is there anything like a decisive scholarly (or popular) history of how the United States came to be so brimful of illegal aliens? Was it mostly about cheap labor at one time, and then turned into a political strategy?

    Like

    Reply

    1. A bit of both. Here is the Center for American Progress, probably the most influential dem think tank in DC (run by John Podesta and Neera Tanden, integral members of the Clinton/Obama machine) back in 2013.

      Note that they say this is the only way they can hold on to power, so unpopular are their policies with actual americans. They have abandoned the idea of appealing to native-born americans. They despise native-born americans because they cannot control them and they have no interest in making them their perpetual clients (like they do for dysfunctional blacks and latinos, refugees, and other DEI-fied identities).

      https://www.americanprogress.org/article/immigration-is-changing-the-political-landscape-in-key-states/

      Supporting real immigration reform that contains a pathway to citizenship for our nation’s 11 million undocumented immigrants is the only way to maintain electoral strength in the future.

      Also note that “demographics is destiny” is just common sense when uttered by a liberal, but is evidence of fascism and conspiratorial thinking when conservatives mention it.

      By the way, I’m fucking sick of this 11 million number. It has remained the same for the past 30 years. The real number is probably 4-5x that.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. I know! It’s been 11 million absolutely no matter what happens and how wide the border is opened. It’s always 11 million.

        Question: at what point do normies begin to question the 11 million figure?

        Answer: at no point whatsoever. I recently raised this issue with a normie friend but it was useless. She heard 11 million in 2001, so 11 million it is in perpetuity.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

      2. And by the way, the idea that it’s an ethnic replacement and that the libs are talking about it openly is unacceptable even to some MAGAs. I tried with two I know, and they immediately turned into prissy libs on that one subject.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

Leave a reply to Clarissa Cancel reply