As promised: Today I’m going to ask a question that has to do with America’s Constitutional and criminal laws that I feel are being ignored and abused by our current, and a past President, and by many politicians like Mr. McCain of Arizona, Mr. Reed, and many other politicians on both sides of the political spectrum.
The question on the table is do Presidents, Congress, or the Supreme Court Justices have the right to grant a group special privileges to break US Criminal and/or Constitutional laws, and do these said Government powers have the power to use a law, that was specifically written to protect US Compatriot citizens, to protect foreign, not US citizens, who ignore US criminal/immigration and Constitutional laws, and then ask for whole sale pardons from the US Government. By now most Americans reading this post/op-ed more than likely know that the law on the table is the law/power of granting Amnesty to allow foreign citizens to break and ignore US Criminal, Immigration, and Constitutional laws. Although this post or op-ed is not going to discuss each of these laws in depth, we want to note that when foreigners enter US sovereign soil illegally, or by ignoring and breaking US laws, they are not just entering without permission, they fall under US criminal laws because they are now wanted for trespassing and breaking US laws; they fall under US Immigration laws because they did not follow US Immigration and accepted world wide procedures for entering foreign countries under recognized and set procedures for legal immigration/Visas.
Now that we have established the legal precedence for what is, and what is not, legal entry onto US sovereign soil, we want to show why the law of Amnesty should never, and can never, be used to allow foreign trespassing citizens (who enter US soil illegally) to break or ignore US laws and then be forgiven and rewarded by any US Government power: Before we start our complete citation’s words, we want to point out that Amnesty is usually defined as “a concept of law that permits a head of state [(like America’s president)] to overlook or forget offenses committed by persons,,, or in this case–a massive group like of anti-Vietnam war soldiers and US citizens who defied the draft and/or went AWOL.. or people against an authority, which is customarily their government” (Dolan, F Edward Jr. Amnesty: The American Puzzle, Franklin Watts. New York. 1975. P3.). The next rational question to ask is what kind of “…what kind of offenses is the authority [(President)] allowed to forgive and whom can this authority forgive with this law’s concept…” (Dolan Ibid)? Dolan adds, “we’ve learned that Amnesty officially forgets acts that were branded as CRIMINAL [(Note: That by illegally using the law of Amnesty to help Mexico’s and other nation’s illegal, trespassing aliens on US soil both Reagan and Obama admitted these illegals are criminals, and undesirables under US immigration laws.)] at the time they were committed… for example military deserters of the Vietnam war–because they broke US Laws, who did it as a political protest against the American’s Government involvement in Vietnam…
Note: Amnesty is almost always granted ONLY (Our emphasis) to groups… and to segments of the Nation’s (in this case America) public who rose up in political opposition to THEIR government… so Amnesty is a tool the US Government uses to forgive their citizens whose offenses are based on honest opposition to laws and policies they find odious” (Dolan, Ibid, Pp 3-4). [(This means the country’s own citizens, and not foreigners, or trespassing illegals who do not have these right, or fall under this law.)]
To conclude, since no US Government has the power to grant foreign criminals Amnesty, I feel both Reagan and Obama broke US criminal and Constitutional law, and in reality abused their powers by doing whole sale acts of granting Presidential Pardons to foreign criminals. The only power, they really have, to use in criminal cases. But, I bet this power is also limited to only US legal citizens.