Why the "Rule of Law" was important--and why the Dems have rejected it

"The rule of law" should be a simple concept.  But apparently about 40% of Americans don't believe in that HUGELY important principle.

For young Americans (and abysmally smug Democrats), "the rule of law" is one of the foundations of Western culture.  From the Magna Carta to the Constitution, Aristotle to John Locke to Montesquieu to Hayek, the notion that "laws" should apply equally to all humans is totally radical--because in the past, laws only applied to "subjects."

Serfs.  Deplorables.  By contrast, rulers could do whatever they wanted.  Laws didn't apply to them.

Democrats: "Whut wrong wif dat?  Dat perfekly reasonable!  A gud society MUST have one set of Laws for serfs, and another one for rulers!  History shows dat jus' reasonable!"

As you surely realized, the idea that rulers had to obey "laws" was totally revolutionary.  For all of prior history rulers made laws but never had to obey 'em.  So insisting that rulers obey "laws" was...revolutionary.

To this day, dictators and thugs don't realize that people beyone a certain level of understanding do NOT want "two sets of laws"--one for rulers and a far harsher one for mere deplorables, eh?

Ever seen a painting of "Lady Justice" wearing a blindfold?  If you wanna educate your kids, ask 'em why she's wearing a blindfold.  Seriously.

There's an old saying: "In hindsight, everything is obvious."  Keep that in mind.

The Founders were brilliant.  But even they dropped the ball a few times:  One was in failing to write in the Constitution "The laws shall be applied equally to all citizens, and anyone who claims otherwise shall be executed immediately."  They didn't explicitly write that cuz it seemed obvious--to them.

But sadly, over time the U.S. has somehow "drifted away" (love that phrase!) from the notion that the law applies equally to all, regardless of power or status--and toward the concept that "powerful people" can do whatever the hell they like, without consequence.

Example from a decade ago: Hilliary Clinton ordered her lackeys to destroy subpoenaed cell phones, and to wipe her subpoenaed private email server "beyone the possibility of forensic recovery"--and the utterly corrupt former head of the FBI, James Comey, said "No U.S. Attorney would prosecute her" for that.  Certainly no DeepState Attorney, eh?

In today's America "connected," powerful people can break the law and then joke about it.

Example #infinite:  Clinton fixer Sandy Berger stole top-secret documents from the National Archives--but wasn't punished.

Example: "Protected" rioters burn police precincts and federal buildings in Portland and Minneapolis, and no one is charged, let alone put in prison, cuz..."deez were jus' peaceful exercises of free-speech!"  An' all duh surveillance cameras din' show nobuddy!"

Horseshit.

At some point--when citizens have seen enough of this--the country ceases to have any confidence in "the rule of law."  Cuz it's been bastardized by the Left and Democrats to exempt *them."

The fact that powerful politicians--the U.S. equivalent of "royalty"--are immune from prosecution is obvious to everyone. The princes of Democrat politics and their minions are never charged for breaking the law.  "Dis jus' 'free speech,' pipo!"

In the case of the arsonists and looters in NYC during the BLM riots five years ago, the looters were given huge cash settlements from corrupt Dem governments--for the inconvenience of being arrested!

Now that Trump is president you might think that's changing, eh?.

It might have, except for leftist judges and the Lying Mainstream Media.

No sense in my taking my time to explain either.  Either it was obvious, or readers would reject any logic.

SO...where does that leave us?

Ahh yes: downtown Los Angeles, where Dem rulers like Karen Bass and Gavin Newsom are bleating "Deez *peaceful protests* were ALL under control!  Dey only got...mo' *intense* cuz Trumpie called in duh National Guard!  Yep yep yep!  If his eeebil Nazi Gestabp hadn't tried to deport po' innocent 'undocumented Americans,' who had nevah committed any crimes AT ALL (since entering the U.S. illegally is NOT a crime, reeeally!), dere wudn't have been NO problems at all!"

Ahh, so if we just stop deporting pipo who are in the U.S. illegally, you Dems will call off your thugs?

Wow, such a deal!  If only we'd known this in 1941 it would have saved us SO many lives and billions of dollars, eh?  And you Dems would be absolute delighted to be speaking German or Japanese now, right?  Cuz you've told us "This is THE solution to aggression," right?

For those who haven't figured it out yet: The Democrat-led throwdown in LA and four other big U.S. cities is a "watershed moment."  We either defeat the rioters and re-assert control over who is allowed to enter the U.S., or we surrender that crucial piece of sovereignty.

Democrats bleat that the government *has NO right to deport anyone who's here illegally.*  And Democrat voter seem to agree, *even if they're committed violent crimes in the U.S., against U.S. citizens.
 
Isn't that clever?

Democrats: "Dat *totally reasonable!*  Deez pipo don't commit crimes, reeeally!  So it beez *mean* to deport 'em!"

Hey cupcake, try going to Mehico and demanding that the Mexican govt give you free food and housing and medical and college tuition.  Cuz surely they'll do that!

Democrats: "Dat don't mattah!  In dis country duh gruberment will do what ouah Party wants!  An' we want unlimited immigration, without vetting.  Cuz dat whut we want!"

Ahh, well there ya go, eh?  That's called "Democrat logic."