Are Illegal Immigrants “Above the Law?”

Then why are they still here?

We have an entire political party bound and determined that Americans not be allowed to police our own border. And the establishment portion of the “other” party agrees, which is a big part of why they are loathed by their own voters.

These people should be ignored and told to shut up. Government officials helping illegals break the law - and then illegally using taxpayer money to support these outlaws - should be arrested, charged, tried, convicted and hanged for treason.

No, that’s not overstating the issue.

Americans entrust these officials with the safety and security of ourselves, our families, our communities and our country. They are breaking the law to make us less safe and less secure. Americans are being assaulted, raped and murdered by the illegals our own government is illegally bringing in.

Are these officials above the law? No. Then they need to be treated as the outlaws they are.

This same anti-border cohort constantly yammers about Trump that, “No one is above the law!”

Prove it.

And why are we still awaiting a national figure in the Republican Party to have the below conversation?

R: “Your party keeps yakking about the rule of law. Every one of these illegal immigrants broke the law. Are you saying they are above the law?”

D: “But the law is broken!”

R: “Then change it. But until you do,  it’s still the law, it must be enforced, and these people are breaking it. If you believed in the rule of law, you’d enforce it. Why do you refuse to do so?”

D: “We tried to pass a bipartisan change and your party blocked it.”

R: “That doesn’t answer why you refuse to enforce the law. It’s also called ‘representative democracy;’ I guess you didn’t make your case sufficiently to ensure enough Americans - and their representatives - agreed with you.”

D: “But Trump killed the bill.”

R: “Then you need to work harder. The overwhelming majority of people in your party and mine want the borders secure and the law enforced. Why is that difficult to understand?”

D: “But it’s xenophobic.”

R: “So what? Take your complaints to the chaplain. It’s the law. Are you for or against the rule of law?”

D: “But these people just want a better life!”

R: “So what? Why does that allow them to break the law?”

D: “But… they’re refugees from violence!”

R: “So what? Do we get to ignore the law in our own country because people in other countries are mean? Is there a carve-out in our immigration law for savages killing each other in a foreign country? If so, show me where it is. I’ll wait.”

“Why” vs. “That”

The problem in the entire argument about illegals is that we are discussing the “why” instead of the “that.”

The law defines the “that” of illegal immigration, “that” these people are here in violation of the law.

The “why” is part of the legislative process of making and passing the law. “Why” defines how the law is written, any caveats written-in to the law, etc. “Why” is part of the process of making the law.

Once the law is written and passed by Congress, and then signed by the president, “why” is irrelevant; only the “that” remains: that it is against the law for these people to be here; that they must be deported.

It’s the law.

Unless we want to live in a totalitarian society under the rule of man, rather than in a democratic republic under the rule of law, illegal aliens - MUST - be rounded up and deported. That’s what the law demands.

And if their home country doesn’t want them, too bad. We don’t want them, either, and this is OUR country. WE get to define who comes here.

• Drop them off at the border of their country.

• Put a parachute on them and throw them out of an airplane.

• Put them in a boat outside their maritime exclusion zone, with a paddle and a compass.

But get them the hell out of our country.

It’s the law.