Kilmar Abrego Garcia and the Death of Due Process

One man's story provides a warning for us all.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an undocumented immigrant with a legally-binding protection order from an immigration judge, was deported form the United States in direct violation of that order. The Trump administration remove him based on a single anonymous tip claiming, without evidence, that he was affiliated with MS-13. That unsubstantiated claim allowed the administration to label him a terrorist, bypass due process, and forcibly remove him to El Salvador, where his life is now at risk in their harsh prison system.

But this is not just an immigration story. This is not just about whether someone "belongs" here. IT's not about left vs. right, Democrats vs. Republicans, or legal vs. illegal. This is about the Constitution and the Trump administration's blatant disregard for it.

The United States Constitution protects ALL people within its jurisdiction, not just citizens. The courts affirmed that. A judge issued a stay to protect Kilmar Abrego Garcia but that didn't matter.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, aka one of Donald Trump's "Bullshit Barbies", has flatly stated that "He will not be returning to our country." This, despite a Supreme Court ruling instructing the administration to facilitate Garcia's return.

There has been no communication between the U.S. Embassy and the Salvadoran government to bring him back. No visible effort to comply and no accountability for noncompliance.

In a functioning democracy, this would spark immediate congressional oversight. But Congress remains silent, hamstrung by partisanship and loyalty to a president of their own party that they don't want to upset.

This sets an incredibly dangerous precedent. If an administration can invent a justification out of thin air, labeling someone a "terrorist" based on an anonymous and unsubstantiated tip—and use that label to override judicial authority, then no one is safe. Today it's Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Tomorrow it could be a journalist. A political opponent. A protester. You!

This case is a test balloon: What happens when a president defies court orders? What happens when an entire administration backs that defiance? What happens when the institutions built to check executive power instead fall in line?

The implications stretch far beyond immigration law. We're talking about executive overreach so brazen that it openly disregards both judicial rulings and constitutional protections. That's not politics as usual. That's authoritarianism creeping in through a back door and being labeled as "national security."

Make no mistake, this is also a political trap set by the Trump administration. He and they want this debate because they know that if the Democrats push for Garcia's return, it can be spun as "Democrats defending illegal aliens." The soundbites and TV ads write themselves.

But the real issue—the one Democrats MUST lean into—is not about immigration status. It's about whether the executive branch can now function like a monarchy, erasing legal protections with a word and ignoring court orders with a shrug.

If that precedent stands, no party affiliation, citizenship status, or political loyalty will protect anyone in the long term.

The courts have spoken. The Constitution is clear. But none of this matters if they are ignored. Congress is not acting. The president is not complying. The media cycle is distracted. And a man who should never have been deported is stranded in a dangerous country—because an administration decided it could make up the rules as it goes.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia may seem like just one person in a broken immigration system, but his case is the canary in the coal mine. If we don't speak up now the next person stripped of rights could be someone you know. It could also be you.

The Great Fiscal Fraud: How the Republicans Hoodwinked America on the Economy

Republican party has always anointed itself as the party of fiscal responsibility and the champions of economic growth and prosperity. They've painted themselves as the party willing to tightened belts and balanced budgets while portraying Democrats as reckless spenders with a tendency for economic chaos. The data however, tells a very different yet truthful story exposing a carefully crafted lie that has been perpetrated for decades!

Democrats Historically Lead on the Economy

Let's cut through the spin and look at the numbers...

• GDP Growth
• Since WWII, real GDP growth has averaged 4.35% under Democrats compared to 2.54% under Republicans.
• Job Creation
• Democrats have overseen 2.5% annual job growth while Republicans lag behind at just over 1%.
• Recessions
• Of the 11 recessions in the modern era, 10 of them began under Republican administrations.
• Stock Market Performance
• The S&P 500 - returned 8.4% annually under Democrats compared to 2.7% under Republicans
• The DJIA - returned 11.45% annually under Democrats compared to 6.03% under Republicans
• The Nasdaq Composite - has returned 17.3% annually under Democrats compared to 12.87% under Republicans

These aren't partisan talking points being spouted by MSNBC pundits or writers for The Nation. They are actual facts; and they challenge the Republican's self-proclaimed superiority in regards to the economy.

The "Trickle-Down" Mirage

Another fairy tale of Republican fiscal "wisdom" comes from (or rather stolen from) the Ronald Reagan's "trickle-down" or supply-side economics. The theory promised that tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations would spur investment, create jobs, and ultimately benefit everyone. In practice, it led to ballooning deficits and increased income inequality. Instead of investing, the wealthy stash that money they saved from tax cuts offshore instead of pumping it back into the economy. The corporations use the money they save in the tax cuts to buy back more of their tock instead of investing in more workers, services, and means of production. Instead of acknowledging this, Republicans simply point to how well the country was doing under Reagan and use that façade to justify their continued push of these policies. What really happened was more base don the economic climate of the time rather than a policy that would produce sustainable results. Taxes are now so low that the effects his tax cuts had in the 80s can't work in today's economic conditions. If they are attempted, the results are short lasting and subjected to diminishing returns.

Debt Contribution by Party (1945-2025)

• Democratic Party
• Total % Increase of 200% and an Average % Increase Per Year of 4.5%
• Republican Party
• Total % Increase of 400% and an Average % Increase Per Year of 11.1%

Despite these outcomes, the Republicans continue to champion supply-side policies. These policies make their donors richer. IF their donors are richer, they can pump more cash into Republican campaigns to keep this narrative going...and their cash flowing.

The Carefully Crafted Republican Economic Playbook

In order to keep people in the dark about their actual record on the economy, they resort to the following steps...

1. Implement Tax Cuts and Deregulate - Primarily benefiting the wealthy and corporations, leading to reduced federal revenue and less rules in place to keep corporate institutions from exploiting consumers
2. Increase Spending - Often on defense and other priorities without offsetting the lost revenue
3. Balloon the Deficit - As a result of the above policies, this contributes to recession
4. Blame Democrats - When Democrats take office and attempt to address the fiscal mess, they're labeled as "tax-and-spend liberals"
5. Rinse and Repeat

It's a cycle of fiscal irresponsibility followed by political blame-shifting.

The Democratic Difference

In contrast, Democratic administrations have historically taken steps to reduce deficits and manage the economy responsibly:

• Clinton Era - Achieved budget surpluses through a combination of tax increases and spending restraints
• Obama Administration - Implemented the Affordable Care Act and other measures aimed at reducing long-term deficits
• Biden Administration - Focused on infrastructure and social programs with proposed tax increases on the wealthy to fund them

Time to Burst the Bubble

The Republican narrative of fiscal responsibility is a carefully constructed illusion, unsupported by historical data. It's time for voters to recognize this same old pattern: Republican policies often lead to increased deficits and economic instability, while Democratic administrations have a track record of promoting growth and fiscal common sense. The next time a Republican politician touts their party's economic prowess, remember the numbers and consider who's really been managing the nation's finances responsibly.

Court Orders Are Just Suggestions Now

In a functioning democracy, the rule of law is upheld not just by words said or printed, but by how they are enforced and the mechanisms in place to do so. When a court issues an order, it is the law, not a request or suggestion to be followed. But what happens when those in power simply choose to ignore it? What happens when the Justice Department, the very agency tasked with enforcing judicial authority, refuses to do their job for political reasons? Let's find out, shall we?

The Justice Department, while part of the executive branch, has a duty to uphold the rule of law. It is supposed to be the enforcement arm for the people, ensuring that rulings passed down by federal judges carry weight. But under Attorney General Pam Bondi—appointed by Trump for her unwavering loyalty rather than her legal sense—the DOJ has become just another political weapon. Bondi’s DOJ is not concerned with enforcing contempt rulings or court injunctions against administration officials. The U.S. Marshals, the enforcement arm responsible for carrying out federal court orders, report to the DOJ. If the Attorney General refuses to direct them to act, judicial rulings become meaningless. Court orders without enforcement are no different from strongly worded letters.

Congress was designed to check the executive branch, but what happens when Congress itself refuses to act? With Trump’s party controlling both the House and the Senate, any attempt to hold the administration accountable is dead on arrival. Even clear-cut violations of court orders go unpunished because the legislative branch has abandoned its role as a check on executive power.

This is how authoritarianism takes hold; not through dramatic coups, but through the slow erosion of enforcement mechanisms. The president defies the courts, the DOJ refuses to act, and Congress looks the other way. At that point, what remains of our constitutional system? When one branch can openly defy another without consequence, the separation of powers, one of the hallmarks of our system of government, ceases to exist.

John Adams warned against a government of men rather than laws. George Washington warned us of the dangers of political parties; and it was Winston Churchill (among others) who said "Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it." Countless dictators, tyrants, and authoritarians have displayed similar patterns of behavior but some of our greatest leaders have given us a roadmap to resist these behaviors in order to maintain a functional government system. If judicial rulings can be ignored with impunity, then the courts are no longer a co-equal branch of government. They are an advisory body at best. The rule of law becomes a mere suggestion that is upheld only when it is convenient for those in power. Without enforcement, the judiciary is powerless. Without congressional oversight, the executive is unchecked. This is how democracy burns; and from it's ashes, the foundation of a dictatorship is built.

If this continues, it won’t just be administration officials ignoring court orders; it will be state governments, businesses, and individuals deciding which laws they will and won’t follow. Precedent matters. If the most powerful figures in government can thumb their noses at judicial authority, why should anyone else respect the courts? The moment we allow enforcement of the law to become optional is the moment democracy dies. The Constitution was not meant to be a list of suggestions. If we fail to act now, we may wake up in a country where the law only applies to the powerless, while the powerful do as they please.

This is what we call a constitutional crisis. The question is, will anyone do anything about it; or will we let democracy die to the thunderous applause of the Republican controlled Congress? I for one am rooting for the former.

Signalgate: National Security By Group Chat

You know we’re in trouble when national security decisions are being hashed out in a Signal chat like friends talking about fantasy football. Welcome to Signalgate, where the only thing more alarming than the breach of protocol is the sheer, unfiltered incompetence of the people involved.

Trump’s National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, former Florida congressman and a regular on his knees at Mar-a-Lago, set up a Signal group chat that included a who’s who of the Trump administration’s "finest." The cast of characters included Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, among others. Oh, and just for spice, journalist Jeffrey Goldberg was also added to the chat...accidentally...by the guy in charge of national security.

Folks! It would be funny if it weren’t true.

Waltz twisted himself into a rhetorical pretzel trying to explain Goldberg’s presence in a chat not meant for press eyes, claiming it was an “error” and “no big deal.” Sure...and January 6th was just a misunderstood brunch gathering.

Wait! It gets worse! Why? Because of course it does! Pete Hegseth, who apparently thinks OPSEC is a fitness app or drinking game, posted strike package details about planned air strike operations in Yemen that hadn’t launched yet. Just when you think these people couldn't possibly be this reckless or dumb, the Signal chat transcript proves otherwise. Don't believe me? Read for yourself! Below is an actual message sent by Secretary Pete Hegseth in the unsecured chat of (regardless of what they say) classified information.

TEAM UPDATE:
TIME NOW (1144et): Weather is FAVORABLE. Just CONFIRMED w/ CENTCOM we are a GO for mission launch.
1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)
1345: “Trigger Based” F-18 1st Strike Window Starts (Target Terrorist is @ his Known Location so SHOULD BE ON TIME) — also, Strike Drones Launch (MQ-9s)
1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)
1415: Strike Drones on Target (THIS IS WHEN THE FIRST BOMBS WILL DEFINITELY DROP, pending earlier “Trigger Based” targets)
1536: F-18 2nd Strike Starts — also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.

Current defense department officials familiar with this type of information have confirmed what any semi-conscious person with two brain cells to rub together knows: this kind of material is ALWAYS classified. Sharing it puts F-18 pilots at risk. These aren't abstract war games! This is life and death, in real time, shared over an app more commonly used for coordinating birthday parties.

Gabbard and Ratcliffe, clearly tasked with gaslighting Congress and their constituencies, both testified that no classified information was shared despite all evidence and military protocol to the contrary. It’s as if the mere act of denying it, with enough condescension and force, can undo the damage. You cannot sit here and say that the exact times, exact aircraft types, and exact weapons to be deployed in a military strike against an enemy with anti-aircraft weapon systems would be considered non-classified information. This is a betrayal to our brave aviators who display more courage, dedication and honor on one mission than any of these ass kissers can hope to display in 10 lifetimes. This is a betrayal to past heroes who paid the ultimate sacrifice on the beaches of Normandy fighting alongside our allies to rid the world of fascism and a brutal murderous dictator. This is a betrayal to the people of our nation that you are tasked with keeping safe.

And how have these officials responded to questions about this reckless behavior, more specifically questions from Democratic senators? With stonewalling, evasion, arrogance, and that there's nothing to see here because of the fact that the strike was successful. What if one of our pilots was shot down? Would there be the typical "thoughts and prayers" statement and a "they know the risks of the mission" line? Information like this is handled with the utmost care so that our service members go on their mission needing ONLY to worry about the risks of that particular mission, not the dangers of their mission details being leaked to the enemy. They are lucky it was a journalist with an impeccable reputation and not Iran or the Houthis that saw this. Instead, no accountability. No real answers. Just spin and ass loads of "I don't recall" statements. In doing this, they are undoing all that we fought for and ushering back in the very threats we always aimed to defeat.

Now imagine—just imagine—if Joe Biden or Barack Obama had overseen something even a fraction as reckless. Republicans would be setting up gallows on the Capitol lawn again. Fox News would be running 24/7 graphics of “TRAITORGATE” and demanding immediate resignations with congressional republicans fighting over who got to file the first impeachment articles.

But now? Crickets. The same GOP that turned Hillary Clinton’s emails into a four-year Benghazi character assassination can't be bothered to care that the current Secretary of Defense casually shared active war plans with a journalist accidentally included in a group chat. The republican's double standard is on full display. According to them, as long as they are in power, nothing is illegal. Nothing is wrong. Nothing to see here. When democrats are in power, everything is illegal, everything is wrong, look at everything they have done to make us all unsafe!

There must be a real investigation. This cannot be hand-waved away as a tech blunder or brushed off as a “nothingburger,” as Stephen Miller might say while drafting his next fascist bedtime story. Congress—yes, even the republican-controlled one—has a duty to act. National security isn’t supposed to be partisan. The reckless endangerment of our military personnel cannot be tolerated just because the people doing it don't want to draw a primary challenge in their next election. What's the easiest way for them to do that? Position yourself at ass level and pucker up good! If they are lucky, they leave with orange lips to show off to the MAGA maniac crowd who only wishes it were them.

But let’s be honest. The lack of action isn’t surprising—it’s just confirmation. Confirmation that the GOP isn’t a serious governing party anymore. It’s a club of opportunists more interested in performative outrage and loyalty to one man than in protecting American lives or upholding their oaths.

So, here’s your moment of clarity. These people aren’t just incompetent, they’re dangerous. And if we let this go unanswered—if we accept that our national security can be botched over encrypted memes and ego boosts—then we deserve the chaos that comes next.

Outside the bubble, the air is thick with incompetence, lies, and betrayal. Inside the Signal chat, it’s all vibes, no accountability.

Liberty On Life Support

If I could think of a more fitting title for an obligatory introductory post, I would! But here we are, watching liberty's heart beat grow weaker by the day, sustained only by the rare instance of civic outrage and a steady drip of political apathy.

Welcome to Outside the Bubble, where no party is safe from scrutiny, no politician is shielded from satire, and no unconstitutional overreach goes unnoticed. This blog exists because our country is being hijacked by a grotesque mix of authoritarian ambition, feckless opposition, and an electorate that has seemingly abandoned critical thinking in favor of blind allegiance.

Let's start with the latest act of constitutional vandalism—an attempt by the President to unilaterally eliminate birthright citizenship, a move so blatantly unconstitutional that even a first-year law student could see it would get laughed out of court. The Fourteenth Amendment is not a suggestion; it is a cornerstone of American law. Yet, here we are, watching a sitting President pretend he can amend the Constitution with the stroke of a sharpie while an opposition party struggles to muster anything more than a few indignant tweets.

And then there’s the executive branch, now seemingly operating as a reality TV casting call rather than being in the serious business of governing. Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defense? A talking head with no actual military strategic experience is now overseeing the world’s most powerful armed forces while texting classified military strike packages from a barstool? Kash Patel as FBI Director? This professional sycophant is the same man who played political fixer and propagandist is now in charge of federal law enforcement? Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence? A former congresswoman with a strange love for authoritarians is now tasked with overseeing national security? RFK Jr. at Health and Human Services? A walking conspiracy theory now determining public health policy. These aren’t appointments! They're a middle finger to expertise, competency, and the very notion of functional government. I could go on but there are not enough days in the year.

But what’s even more terrifying than these abuses of power is the response, or rather the lack thereof. The opposition party is floundering like a fish out of water, lost in an endless cycle of empty rhetoric and unable to mount a coherent, sustained challenge to an administration steamrolling constitutional guardrails. The party in power is nothing more than a rubber stamp groveling at the feet of their MAGA dictator and following behind him with extra diapers for when he publicly or privately shits his pants. And the American people? Too many are asleep at the wheel, content to cheer for their team rather than defend their freedoms.

When asked what kind of government we have after the Constitutional Convention, Ben Franklin answered simply "A republic, if you can keep it." This isn’t just about politics. It’s about the survival of a constitutional republic. Silence is complicity. Blind fealty is national suicide. And the biggest threat to democracy isn’t just the demagogue in power; it’s the staggering number of people willing to shrug and say, "Well, what can you do?" or "Well, both sides are bad" like this for some reason absolves them from doing anything about it. Just because it is "your team" or "your guy" doing it doesn't make it alright.

The answer? Speak up. Push back. Demand accountability. Because if we don't, liberty isn't just on life support—it’s already being wheeled into the morgue. This nation wasn't built on blind obedience. It was built on defiance. Do we have any left?

Welcome to Outside the Bubble. It’s time to wake up.