Why I’m Not Watching the Impeachment

I have better things to do with my time than to watch political theater when I’ve already seen the show before and fully understand its underlying themes. 

In this political theater version of The Impeachment Sequel, the Democrats continue to act out their very real mental disturbances caused by Trump Derangement Syndrome.  That, and they try to expel their insecurity-caused fear that Donald Trump may run for office again and so they must forever disqualify him.

In addition to being some sort of attempt at Trump hate catharsis, this Impeachment does serve other purposes such as distracting the populace from the many things that President Biden is doing that are potentially dangerous and harmful to this country.  It also shows us that the Democrats have no intention of losing their narrative method of distorting truth as a way to sway the public to their thinking.

For example, in a high-tech Hollywood-like video in which the Democrats replayed Trump’s words at the protest on Jan. 6, the film included his calls to fight for this country and the Constitution but conveniently left out the most important words in which President Trump called for the march and protest to be and remain peaceful. 

And, of course, there are the individual narratives (some would call them lies).  The now infamous and Hollywood like performance of Rep. Ocasio-Cortez about her “near-death experiences” on Jan. 6.  Or the statements by Maxine Waters (and similarly other Democrats) that she never uttered the words that most have seen or listened to on tape calling for violence against Trump and his supporters.

But then, such misleading presentations are not surprising when you are holding an impeachment that the majority of actual and leading Constitutional Law scholars in this country assert is not constitutional.  It is not surprising when the judge for the “trial” is also a partisan Democrat senator-participant who is firmly on record as believing Trump must be impeached.  

This is nothing more than a show trial.  There is nothing to see here unless your desire is to watch the Democrats display their disrespect for our Constitution, their pathological hate for one man, their hate for American ideals, and their disregard for the actual business of the people that they ought to be conducting.

Instead of the distraction of this political theatrical re-run, try considering some of what it is distracting you from.  There is so much; let me list just a few that you might have missed.

There is the walk-back of the promise of immediate jobs for the tens of thousands of pipeline and oil workers that Biden’s executive orders have put out of work.  When will jobs for these people who need to support themselves and families now become an actuality?  Oh, sometime in the future; no time soon, but it will be worth the wait his press secretary tells us.  Worth it for whom?  The workers’ starving children?  How can this not remind one of Stalin’s five-year plans that repeatedly promised the current sacrifice would be rewarded in the future?

There is the cancelling that continues in all spheres.  People silenced by social media, by their employers, and by new executive orders that are effective not only in current and present silencing, but in creating a fear that essentially works to silence the potential of future speech opposing Left views.  Again, we are reminded of Stalinist Russia where those who spoke out against the Soviet plan were threatened and harassed, sometimes beaten and arrested, expelled or put to death.  While we may not have gone as far as Great Terror Russia, the current silencing/censoring/cancelling from the political Left and its symbiotic partners serves to quash those who might otherwise speak out.

This instilling of fear is further amplified by such things as the recent Bank of America data share in which it provided the government with the names of ANYONE who, from their banking records, showed they were in DC on or around Jan. 6.  When the federal authorities asked, Bank of America turned over the results of its internal scan to federal authorities.  The profile requested and provided included: "1. Customers confirmed as transacting, either through bank account debit card or credit card purchases in Washington, D.C. between 1/5 and 1/6. 2. Purchases made for Hotel/Airbnb RSVPs in DC, VA, and MD after 1/6. 3. Any purchase of weapons or at a weapons-related merchant between 1/7 and their upcoming suspected stay in D.C. area around Inauguration Day. 4. Airline related purchases since 1/6."

That is, if you were visiting your mother and used your BOA card to buy a coffee and bagel on the morning of Jan. 6 you were reported to the feds by BOA, and they felt no restraints about their ability to call you in and question you as if you were a terrorist.   BOA apparently did not notify its customers they were being spied upon.  And indeed, people who had done nothing wrong other than being in DC on the 6^th were called in and interrogated before being cleared. 

If this does not give you the sense of some sort of a police state, then let me suggest that you also look at the militarized encampment that our capitol has become; an encampment not to protect the people, but to keep them from their government.

There are of course the many international proclamations and orders that have been made by President Biden, all with little thought or even time for consideration.  They are either simply a spiteful reversal of Trump policies, regardless of the pros or cons of those policies, or they are a response to Leftist demands that must be met immediately because they address some alleged “crisis” either of environment or immigration.  Yet even a cursory review of many of these actions by independent experts reveal that their long-term effects will be anything but good.

And, finally, let me mention the Time article that sets forth the collusion between politicians, big Tech and big Corporations to ensure the outcome of the election to be against Trump.  The article brags that this action was heroic because these people took it upon themselves to adjust the will of the people to ensure an outcome that they, not necessarily the people, favored.  And let me just suggest that any dictator similarly sees as heroic any actions that ensure his retention of power regardless of their suppression of the will of the people.

So, no, I am not watching the political theater.  I am hoping that it may finally assuage the irrational if not psychotic Trump-hatred, but I am pretty sure it will not.  I would rather reflect upon the above and many similar activities that the Left engages in right before our eyes.  My reflections include not only how they are destroying the good of this country, but also how to open the eyes of my fellow citizens to what is going on in this comedy that is really a tragedy for America.

Just Another Drop in the Bucket

In an unprecedented action the House voted to remove Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from her committees.  Those committees include the Committee on Education and Labor and the House Budget Committee.  Not only does this remove her (and hence her constituents’) voice on those committees; it also changes the balance of power (favorably for the Left) on those committees.

Before she was elected to Congress, Rep. Greene, on social media, posted or “liked” some alleged violent statements and some alleged conspiracy theories.  Her constituents knew this and yet they voted for her.  They wanted her voice to represent them in Congress including on committees.  Yet, the majority of her Congressional colleagues (mostly Democrat) did not like her views and so voted to relieve her of her committee assignments, effectively silencing not just her voice, but the voice of her constituents as well.

This action invites any majority to simply remove voices that do not support their own. It sets a very dangerous precedent.

This is not what an America that tolerates and appreciates diverse views does. This is what a government ruled by people who believe their view should be the only view does.  This is what a totalitarian regime does.

If you are not outraged, you have no idea what America or democracy or our democratic republic is all about.  This has nothing to do with your personal beliefs.  It has to do with accepting the silencing of voices that those in power do not like. 

This is yet one more notch in the massive silencing that is going on and that I addressed in my more lengthy post yesterday.  It may seem to you like just a drop in the bucket, nothing to get worked up over.  But when that bucket is full, it will hold every drop of the freedoms that Americans now enjoy.  And those in power, not the people, will hold that bucket.  They can toss it out, down the drain, and likely will before they ever let you drink from it again.

                                                       

Impeachment or Vengeance?

Monday Nancy Pelosi intends to introduce articles of impeachment against Donald Trump.  Most Democrats support this move.  Republicans are somewhat split.

But does this move make sense?  Is it in keeping with Biden’s claim of being a unifier?  To answer that question one must go beyond the emotional hysteria and look at law and facts (though that emotional hysteria will come into the answer as well). (As to more on Biden’s unity, see my post from Jan. 9 HERE)

Most well-respected constitutional scholars who are asked will tell you that President Trump’s actions on January 6 do not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.  See for example Jonathan Turley HERE  or Alan Dershowitz HERE 

The standard for violent speech is found in Brandenburg v. Ohio; it allows the government to criminalize speech “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”

Trump, in his typically bombastic fashion, never actually called for violence or riots. What he did is to urge his supporters to march on the Capitol to raise their opposition to the certification of electoral votes and to back the challenges being made by a few members of Congress. Trump told the crowd “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices be heard.”  He ended his remarks by saying a protest at the Capitol was meant to provide Republicans “the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.” He told the crowd, “Let us walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.”

We should note that such sorts of marches and demonstrations frequently occur in DC when there is important legislative or legal business or decisions occurring.  There are often marches and demonstrations outside the Supreme Court when the Court is hearing a particularly important or divisive case.  Similar words are always heard during the speeches that precede such marches and demonstrations.

Dershowitz stated that while he personally disapproves of what Trump said in his Wednesday address, "it comes within core political speech, and to impeach a president for exercising his First Amendment rights would be so dangerous to the Constitution." 

Turley states, “There was no call for lawless action by Trump. Instead, there was a call for a protest at the Capitol. Moreover, violence was not imminent, as the vast majority of the tens of thousands of protesters were not violent before the march, and most did not riot inside the Capitol. Like many violent protests in the last four years, criminal conduct was carried out by a smaller group of instigators. Capitol Police knew of the march but declined an offer from the National Guard since they did not view violence as likely.”

Both Turley and Dershowitz believe that this impeachment would set dangerous precedents for the future.  "It would lie around like a loaded weapon ready to be used by either party against the other party, and that’s not what impeachment or the 25th Amendment were intended to be."(Dershowitz).

Turley wrote:

“The damage caused by the rioters this week was enormous, however, it will pale in comparison to the damage from a new precedent of a snap impeachment for speech protected under the First Amendment. It is the very threat that the framers sought to avoid in crafting the impeachment standard. In a process of deliberative judgment, the reference to a snap impeachment is a contradiction. In this new system, guilt is not doubted and innocence is not deliberated. This would do to the Constitution what the violent rioters did to the Capitol and leave it in tatters.”

So, given this solid logic from these and other legal scholars, why then impeach?

I think it is nothing more than the culmination of the irrational hatred toward Donald Trump that we have seen for the last 4 years.  The Democrats for whatever reason have loathed Trump from the moment he became the 2016 candidate.  They have done everything in their power to remove him from office.  They have tried to block his policies.  They have kept their base riled up with animosity toward not only the President but his supporters as well. 

They do not want justice; they are not doing this for the country.  What the Democrats want is to destroy the President, to see him suffer.  I believe many would guillotine him in the public square if they could. 

Here is a thought from one of the few  Democrats in Congress able to be rational about this issue.  Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.) says she will introduce a bill to censure Trump.  A censure is a formal reprimand or statement of disapproval.  She states, "A censure resolution is the only way to send a bipartisan, bicameral message without delay to the country and the world that the United States is a nation of laws."

This makes sense.  While the President’s words were not criminal and do not support impeachment, while they were not violent or inciteful, many believe it would have been a wiser move if he had not given that speech.  So give him what is essentially a reprimand for doing so; that should satisfy anyone whose motive is justice and not retribution or revenge. 

The introduction of this bill for censure is a first step toward the unity that everyone claims they want for the country.  Voting for it instead of impeachment would go a far longer way toward that unity.  It would show us that rational minds prevail.

But the problem is it will not satisfy the irrational hatred that spews forth daily from most of the Left.  They want their pound of flesh (for what I am still not clear).  But we shall see.  Tomorrow will tell us what this is really about – justness or vengeance.   It will also show us how serious the Left is in their calls for peace, healing, and unity.

It Ain't Over Til It's Over

And this will never be over.

(The Scream by Edvard Munch)

Some reflections on the Impeachment Show.

Here are some brief thoughts on the Impeachment Trial itself along with what it tells us about the Democrats.

1.  To those who keep asserting that if there is some personal motive or gain then that makes an otherwise legal/unimpeachable act illegal/impeachable: My guess is that every official act/vote by the senators is done in part for personal gain or other personal motive (most likely for better re-election chances).  The actions of senators may be done for other reasons as well (to further policy they believe in & on which they campaigned for example) and the acts then are constitutional but to follow the reasoning of the Schiff crew, the fact that a senator might also place him/herself in a better position for an upcoming election would make the acts impeachable.  Essentially, to follow their logic, the entire Congress, both chambers, should all be impeached.

2.  Does no one understand how our system of justice works?  In a trial the prosecution or plaintiff brings a complaint.  If that complaint is insufficient, the case will be dismissed.  If after discovery (investigations, depositions of witnesses, etc.) the case is still insufficient to state a claim, then it will be dismissed.  During the period of discovery, some subpoenas as well as other discovery requests and even specific questions may be challenged and decisions on those challenges may be appealed.    Asserting one’s right to question the legitimacy of a discovery request is not an obstruction against the body that made the request. It is not some sort of cover-up.

Justice requires time and patience; its goal is to get it right, not to meet some deadline favorable to an upcoming election.

It is not the duty of the deciding body to find the witnesses and do the investigation.   Some trials will be decided on the pleadings and discovery alone.  Contrary to Ms. Pelosi, witnesses are not required at the trial for it to be a “real” trial.  When a case reaches its conclusion, with or without witnesses, if there is a decision that the defendant is acquitted, then that is a valid decision.

In this case, the House did its investigation, called its witnesses, etc. and determined they had an “overwhelming case” for impeachment.  They brought that to the Senate where, for the first time, the President was able to present his position.  It became clear that the House did not have even an arguable case.  It further became clear that new witnesses, while they might dislike the President and have negative things to say about him or his policies, had no relevant information about the charges brought to the Senate by the House.  Their testimony would be nothing more than a waste of time.  This is not some sort of cover-up, much as the Democrats would like it to be, but is simply an appropriate decision about their case.

3.  It ain’t over til it’s over, and this will never be over.   The Democrats will refuse to accept the acquittal just as they refused to accept the very through investigation and conclusions of the Mueller report, just as they refused to acknowledge evidence that disproved their 11^th hour me-too assault on Justice Kavanaugh, just as they have refused, since November of 2016, to accept Donald J. Trump as the duly elected and legitimate President of the United States of America.  They have yet to understand that their hatred of President Trump does not make him illegitimate, just as it does not make his policies with which they disagree illegal or his manner and leadership style in effectuating those policies unconstitutional.   

Yet, it is clear from the Democrats and their supportive media that they will continue to dig and dig for dirt that will give them the opportunity to try once again to remove the people’s choice from office.  They would rather do that than the business that they were elected to conduct.

4.  In the end, it’s the People’s decision.  You cannot impeach a President just because you don’t like him and you fear that he will continue to act in a manner you don’t like.  The way to fix that is to present an alternate candidate at the next election and let the People decide.  The Democrats seem to think that they know better than the voters who should be president and they are willing to usurp the People’s voice in order to install their choice into the Oval Office.  That is simply un-American.  It is indeed a coup attempt. 

5.  For this country to work, we must both understand and respect our Constitution and our laws.   As a lawyer I have been and continue to be appalled by the Democrats’ continuing disregard for our Constitution, our legal system, and this country’s core principles of justice.  They, of course, are doing it for very political reasons, all of which extend from their desire for power.  But even more appalling is that so many are willing to accept their distortions about our core principles and values, to accept their contempt for our Constitution and system of justice.  In part I blame this on a lack of education about these things; that, combined with a mainstream media that presents and supports the Democrat agenda rather than objective facts places our democracy in a precarious position indeed. 

I can only hope that as the dust from this ridiculous impeachment settles that the People will begin to realize what a farce it really was.  I can only hope that the People will begin to demand that their representatives begin doing their business rather than continuing to pursue their jihad of hate against the President as they seek to grab for themselves what is the People’s power.

Just One Point as We Enter the Next Installment of The Impeachment Show

The next installment of The Impeachment Show begins Wednesday.  The continuing saga of an elite group obsessed with the fact that they lost to a man they hate, a man who is actually performing for the country and doing things that those elite have only promised for decades or simply written off as impossible.

In this episode, like the previous installments, you will be told over and over that the President is evil.  You will be told he is destroying America.  You will be told that if you support him you too are evil and if you don’t join the Impeachers then you will likely go to Hell (assuming you are still archaic enough to still believe in such foolish Biblical concepts that the elite have rejected). 

The Impeachers of course follow the belief that if they simply repeat something often enough then you will believe it to be true.  They see no need for facts or evidence.  Their narrative will control, even if it has no basis in reality. 

The episode will continue to show us how the Democrats’ obsession with destroying the President supersedes all else in their lives, including their job which is to represent the people, pass laws that benefit the country.  It has been a year since the President agreed to a new and better trade agreement with Mexico and Canada.  The Impeachers have still not found time to bring it before Congress for a vote.  They are obsessed instead with holding hearing after hearing designed to remove the President from office.

The Impeachers scheduled the current episode while the President will be abroad, conducting the country’s foreign affairs.  Their invitation to him to participate shows their focus is only on catching and destroying the President, for if he were to accept it would mean forgoing the business of the country, yet if he does not accept, they condemn him for that. 

They are focused on one thing and one thing only.  Destroying the President because he beat them in the 2016 election and is likely to win again in 2020.  Because their sole focused goal is destruction of a man they hate, they are blind to the fact that they are destroying the country in the process.  Not only sewing discord daily among the people, but actually encouraging the disregard and ultimate destruction of our Constitution, our laws, our traditional values, and our very way of life.

So, in this episode the Impeachers will bring in selected witnesses, including professorial types who will comment on the Constitution.  Of course it is doubtful that the witnesses will profess anything that is counter to the narrative of the Democrats, despite the fact that there are many Constitutional experts and scholars who do not stand with the Impeachers and whose testimony could surely reveal the many faults in their hateful narrative game that they are playing.

The Impeachers do not seem to understand that opinion vs. opinion does not result in some sort of guilty verdict.  For that one needs hard facts.  Indeed, America is all about people being tolerant of differing opinions, debating them and the policies they reflect, and speaking their support for those policies in the voting booth.  The Impeachers do not understand that a difference of opinion or hurt feelings that such difference may cause are not grounds for removing a president who was voted into office by the people.  In their obsession to remove the President, they ignore the fact that to do so overturns the will of the people, silences them, and directly contravenes our system of government.

This installment of the Impeachment Show is no different from its predecessors – fake dossier, campaign interference, collusion with Russia, Russian agent, etcetera, etcetera.  Those were just the stage trappings.  And this installment is not about quid pro quo or bribery or coercion or campaign interference or use of office for political gain.  It is about the same old thing and one thing only – getting rid of the President so that those elites, who think they know what is good for the people and should therefore be allowed to silence the voice of the people, can take power.

For that is what the Impeachers truly want.  Power to enforce their narrative upon each and every one of us, to silence those of us who disagree.  The destruction of the President is just one step in their ultimate quest for power.  With that destruction can come the destruction of the office of president and with that the destruction of three equal branches of government while at the same time it will destroy the very government of/for/by the people which is the cornerstone of our democracy.

So, the Drama returns on Wednesday.  The Impeachers vs. America.  Watch hard as they work to convince you that mere opinion without fact must control your life – as long as it is their opinion  Watch hard as they try to implant their narrative in your brain by cunning, and repetition, and by disrespecting your individual thoughts and values. 

Remember as you watch this show that this is your country, not theirs.  That is the one point around which this entire show centers.  The real question is will you cede your power and independence to the power hungry, or will you stand with the people and not let their many voices, the voices that are America, be silenced. 

Jobs Report, Politicians, and Courage

Today the monthly job report for May was good news for anyone looking for work in this country.  The economy added about 223,000 net new jobs in May and the jobless rate hit an 18 year low at 3.8 percent.

This should please anyone who cares about the well-being of this country and its people.  Yet, in checking my afternoon news feed, the first headline I see is: “May Jobs Report is Great News for Everyone Except Democrats” and similar stories focused on how this will affect Democrat chances in November.

And therein lies a huge problem in this country.  Rather than caring about the well-being of the country, too many politicians care more about their own political success and power.  Rather than support and cheer successes of opponents when those successes are good for America, they prefer to cheer only when their opponent fails, not realizing that a failure of any politician, even an opponent, is a failure for the country if the opponent was working for the country's good. 

People, and especially the majority of politicians, take sides and rigidly sit there, attacking successes of those not in their own party and cheering failures of their opponents.  Am I crazy to think that there was once a time when people actually cared about the country, a time where politicians put that country first and above any particular party?

Currently in my state there is a race for Congressional Representative (the seat will be open because the current incumbent, a Democrat, is running for a different office, so the field is wide open).  The primary will take place next week and there are currently 5 (there were 6) Democrats vying for the chance to represent their party in the November election.  One would hope that any one of these people, if ultimately elected, would represent all the people of the District upon their arrival in Washington.  This, however, is likely not the case.

In a debate last month, the first question put to the field of 6 candidates was whether they would stand with the Democratic party and vote to impeach the president.  The first 4 answers were basically a simple “Yes.”  A fifth was more of a “yes, eventually.”  Only one candidate gave the thoughtful answer that he would want to let any investigation play out and then review all the facts before arriving at a decision on this issue.  Responses to most other questions followed a similar pattern.  Of course, the candidate whose answers were deep, thoughtful, and not just a regurgitation of party line is running behind in the polls. 

These 5 (previously 6) candidates are a microcosm of problems with politics and political leadership today.  Most simply say they will make things better or take care of this or that problem but provide no concrete plan of how they will do so.  Many voters seem to be willing to accept platitudes without more.  Most (candidates and voters) fail to see the depth and interconnections of many issues.  They seem to accept party rhetoric without thought or investigation of actual facts.  Many are playing the identity politics game:  the woman, the Native American, the son of immigrants, the homosexual.  While they (and many of their followers) may think that alone is a reason to vote for them, I would prefer to vote for someone for less superficial and more substantive reasons.  I would prefer to vote for a candidate with the courage to think for him or herself.

Sadly, across America we have candidates and voters who are willing to make major decisions based on such superficiality.  I realize it takes work to understand the duties of a particular elected office and to research and understand the substantive abilities and qualities of a candidate.  But this is work that it is any American’s responsibility to undertake.

Today we have many elected representatives not representing the entire body of their constituents, but rather representing their party.  Now it is fine to run on a party ticket; that allows voters to understand generally how the candidate will lean on various issues.  But, once elected, the representative is supposed to represent the people of the district – all the people – and not just those who are members of the same party.  But, because a majority of our politicians don’t seem to understand that, we have little more than robots in Congress:  individuals who fail to think for themselves but simple repeat and vote for the party line, regardless of whether that is best for their district or for the country.

And what is the result?  The answer is what we see daily:  two sides securely dug in, unwilling to actually carry on a dialog with those with opposing views and seemingly only capable of name-calling and otherwise attacking those who do not walk in lock-step with their and their party’s rhetoric.

I, personally, see this problem far more entrenched in the Democrats.  Perhaps that is simply because they are currently out of power or still looking to unseat the duly elected president whose election so shocked them to the point that many still think of him as illegitimate.  I don’t know.  But I do know that when we see things like Democrats being upset with a very positive jobs report, when we see them so focused on finding something – anything (as they grasp at straws) – with which to charge the president, when we see them and their supportive MSM ignoring the many accomplishments of this administration and/or actively tearing them down, then I do know that when I see this I become dismayed about the future of our country.   

So, today I will pray that there will be some Democrats, even those facing elections in November, who will have the courage to stand and applaud this jobs report along with other accomplishments of this administration that are positive for our country.  I will pray for the courage of politicians to care more about the country than their party of themselves.

(Note:  the specific election to which I refer above is that for Congressional District One in New Mexico; the candidate that I see as having courage to think for himself and go beyond mere party rhetoric is Paul Moya).

DACA, Dreamers, and Reality

When laws are broken, people often get hurt.  Often those people are innocent victims.  That does not mean that laws should not be enforced.

With that thought in mind let’s turn to DACA and the Dreamers. 

We have immigration laws in this country that provide very generous immigration policies.  We also have people who enter the country illegally in an effort, for whatever reason, to circumvent those laws.  They are illegal aliens.  Sometimes they bring their children with them – they too are illegally in this country.  One can invoke great feelings of sympathy by describing a very young child who was simply carted here illegally by parents who chose to break the law (for whatever reason, noble or not) and most everyone would say they abhor the idea of that child being thrown out of the country.  But, if I ask whether you want to ignore our laws and our Constitution, you might have a different response; indeed, I would hope that the idea of only following the Constitution, our laws, and our system of government when it feels good would be abhorrent to everyone.

And, that is the first problem with the current DACA situation.  When Congress, the body responsible for enacting laws about immigration, failed to reach a solution to address the Dreamers, the then president Obama, tired of waiting, and asserting feelings of compassion, violated the separation of powers and created DACA by executive fiat.  Not only is that itself wrong, it also sets a bad precedent:  do we really want a president to be able to circumvent our separation of powers when he or she feels strongly about something?  The possibilities of that are truly frightening and suggest a totalitarianism rather than a democracy.

So, let’s accept that Trump was correct in rescinding that order and in placing the answer to the dreamers and the immigration questions they pose in the rightful hands of Congress.  It would seem that all law-abiding citizens should be able to agree on that.  But, sadly, they cannot.  Many of the populace would rather have emotion rule the day.

And, so, we have attorneys general of several states filing suit to retain this program that was created in violation of our Constitution.  These are the folks who should be leading the way in upholding our laws, not arguing to enforce programs that are emotionally pleasing to us regardless of whether their creation violated the basic premises of our Constitution and our democracy.

The disagreement should not be about whether the 2012 DACA order should have been rescinded.  Rather, the disagreement should be focused on how Congress should deal with the fact that there are individuals illegally in this country who were brought here as minors.  On the part of most I suspect there is an urge toward compassion, which is good.  But along with that must come an examination of the consequences, both good and bad, of that compassion.  In weighing those factors, one must first have a basic grasp of the actual facts about DACA and the Dreamers, because proponents of various views will put forth only their interpretations of those facts.

First, let’s consider who the Dreamers are.  They had to be under 31 in 2012 and had to have come to America when they were 15 or younger.  Most of the DACA “children” are in their mid-20s today.  They had to have lived in this country since 2007 (10 years as of today, 5 years when DACA was signed in 2012).  Many have jobs.  They are eligible for Social Security, Medicare, and Earned Income Credit on their taxes, but are not eligible for many other welfare benefits.  Many of the Dreamers hold jobs, and there is an argument being put forward that it would be detrimental to lose them from our work force. 

I will begin with considering that jobs argument.  Are there no eligible American citizens that can fill those jobs? Last time I looked there were still many unemployed Americans looking for work.  I read an article this morning that included a statement by an employer that he had 3 construction jobs filled by dreamers and was concerned he would not find replacements.  Huh?  There are not 3 young people here legally who would be willing to take those jobs?  Is it that he won’t find replacements, or that he won’t find replacements who are as subservient as the DACA employees or perhaps who will demand higher wages or benefits?  Do the people who are asserting that only Dreamers can do the jobs really have that low an opinion of our own young adults?  That, alone, deserves a far deeper discussion, beyond what is being addressed here.

But, I am ready to assume that most – nearly all – the Dreamers are good people who are stuck in a horrible situation through no fault of their own.  (I remind people that life is not fair and we cannot fix everything for everyone).  But, if all it meant was giving citizenship to these young adults who were willing to apply and to go through the formal process, I might be for that.  But again, we must look at reality and reality tells us that things would not end there.

So, here are some of the problem consequences with granting any kind of legal status to the Dreamers.  First, if we revoke the rescission of Obama’s DACA order and allow that order to remain in place, we are setting a dangerous precedent that allows a future president to override Congress, our laws, and our Constitution. 

Second, if Congress reinstates DACA in a legal manner, we are essentially sending the message that if you come here illegally eventually America’s compassion will get the better of itself and its laws and you will be granted some means of becoming a legal resident of the country.  This is even if the DACA program itself is limited only to those currently within the country.  One only has to consider the rise in illegal immigration following the grant of amnesty during President Reagan’s term in office.  What is to prevent illegal immigration of new families coming with the belief that if they wait long enough they will be given some sort of legal status.  Not only does this fly in the face of any legal immigration policy, it is also a slap in the face to those families that choose to pursue a legal path to immigration and citizenship.

We also have family unification programs that allow those immigrants here legally to bring in their families.  So the Dreamers would likely have an opportunity to be joined by family members who otherwise would have had to follow a normal immigration procedure.  So, along with granting legal status to 800,000 young adults under DACA we could also be granting legal status to a significantly larger number as they reunify their families.

I can’t imagine being brought to a country by my parents only to be told I am illegally there and hence must deport.  It is a horrible situation.  On the other hand, I also cannot imagine being over 18, knowing I am illegally present, and not considering alternatives beyond hoping that I eventually be given some sort of legal status. 

This is not an easy problem and we should not provide easy solutions; nor should our solutions be based solely on emotion.  Life is hard.  Laws exist.  When people break the laws, even with the best motive, people are hurt.  Parents who brought their children illegally to America may have believed they were helping their children.  They were not.  They were breaking the laws and their children are now the victims of their illegal behavior. 

These children are now mostly young adults.  Like all young adults, they need to find their path forward, and for many of the Dreamers, just as for many other young adults, that path may not be an easy one.  But that fact alone does not mean that we should grant them legal status.   Congress must seriously consider the many possible consequences of their actions on behalf of the Dreamers, focusing not only on their compassion for these young adults, but also on their compassion for the legal citizens and immigrants of this country and for this country’s laws.