> It's quite clear that the issue described is that ICE and CBP are lawless thugs and should be first up against the wall. *Nothing different today.*
Exactly my point.
The big problem with the arguments about "due process" is that they are pretty non-specific like most of the arguments from the left these days. Like using the terms racist and fascist, they aren't attempts to assert factual statements: they are just insults to be thrown around with people that you disagree with.
In a lot of cases, due process is endless court cases followed by appeal after appeal that can go on for decades involving people that are obviously here without good cause and without permission. Those that wish to apply for asylum can do it at an official crossing. The reasons why they don't do so is obvious. Multiply that by millions of illegal immigrants means that most will never be deported. It is merely an attempt to drown the process to feed their bizarre open border political project. I'll say it again: if you have a welfare system, you *cannot* have mass, illegal immigration.
But, I hear you say, "what about that heavily tattooed gang guy that admitted that he would be murdered by a rival gang if he were ever to be deported back home, that I heard about on the TV that is definitely not a member of a brutal gang? He should get 'due process' despite having been in court and being told that he should be deported." Well, yes.
> You're not too smart, are you?
Please keep the discourse civil. Insults don't really make for reasoned debate.