🦘🦘🦘

Well, yeah...

But anyway, I'm not sure how to explain this chain of events other than the Trump administration refusing to bring him back until they got a grand jury to indict him for something.

That was obvious the minute I heard Garcia was coming back and facing a grand jury indictment.

Whether that indictment survives its first contact with reality, is another matter.

Faulders: What we know is Abrego Garcia is back on his way to the United States. We are told by sources that he is on his way back because he is facing criminal charges. He has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges related to human trafficking. pic.twitter.com/zsPdp4gxL0

— Acyn (@Acyn) June 6, 2025

AG Pam Bondi just used her press conference to make wild accusations against Abrego Garcia that are nowhere to be found in the actual indictment—essentially accusing him of being a murderer and involved in other crimes. Completely unethical and unhinged stuff from DOJ. https://t.co/dhugsS5yNt

— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) June 6, 2025

Which, alone, could get charges dismissed. She’s certainly making it harder to prosecute.

Reporter: At the time DHS declined to take custody of him. What’s happened since in this investigation that brought you here?

Bondi: What has changed is Donald Trump is now president pic.twitter.com/eVkeGQzJxZ

— Acyn (@Acyn) June 6, 2025

So does that.

Kristi Noem less than a month ago: "There is no scenario where Abrego Garcia will be in the United States again."

(No matter what happens, bringing him back to the US is a climbdown for the administration) pic.twitter.com/NpShFMXcvQ

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) June 6, 2025

And this makes me think the Administration is hoping for a kangaroo court. They won’t get it; but there’s a whole lot of “the fix is in” energy here 

New rule: if it isn't in the indictment, it isn't true. She is lying her way out of total incompetency. https://t.co/n3WJCJG9tA

— Juliette Kayyem (@juliettekayyem) June 6, 2025

It’s a bold strategy. Let’s see if it works out for them.

For example: ICE arrested the ENTIRE family of the man in Boulder accused of assaulting marchers.  That didn’t get them deported, however:

United States District Judge Gordon P. Gallagher ordered the government to immediately halt deportation proceedings against the suspect’s family, however, and Leavitt blasted the “rogue” judge for defying the president.

“Well, this is just another rogue decision by a rogue judge who is trying to be—I don’t know—the president of the United States? The secretary of state? The secretary of homeland security?” said Leavitt, still seemingly missing her emblematic gold cross after a recent comedy show take-down. “Surely, these important matters of both homeland security and national security do not belong to lower district, local judges in these districts across the country.”

I’m a little confused as to how she thinks the family gets to the Supreme Court (presumably the only court she would allow to challenge the POTUS) without going through the trial court, and without blocking their deportation in the meantime. Or are they supposed to be guilty until finally proven innocent? (No, that’s not how equity works, but the principle is analogous.) Which, in this case, would mean deporting them and then bringing them back to…face criminal charges?

Stephen Miller wants it to be so:

Miller also wants to deny due process to anyone he doesn’t like.

Yeah, that’s not how this works. That’s not how any of this works.