"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.
Holy fuck.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?
Thanks for the laugh.
not at all. dont give a fuck about the people
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?
You have to be kidding
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anything
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
Do you think more people would have crossed if there was no wall, or the exact same amount?
Think hard. It's a really difficult question.
Fewer. Now do the cost/benefit analysis like anyone should do before taking action.
Doesn't have quite the same shine after that IMO.
That isn't the argument I'm making.
Tommy is claiming that there is ZERO impact at all. None. 100 percent of people would bypass it.
Obviously how effective and is it worth the cost is the legit argument. Anyone with a brain realizes that. But he and his ilk have gone full on "LOL UR DUMB IT WONT STOP A SINGLE PERSON"
"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.
Holy fuck.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?
Thanks for the laugh.
not at all. dont give a fuck about the people
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?
You have to be kidding
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anything
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
Do you think more people would have crossed if there was no wall, or the exact same amount?
Think hard. It's a really difficult question.
Fewer. Now do the cost/benefit analysis like anyone should do before taking action.
Doesn't have quite the same shine after that IMO.
Exactly where I've been at from the beginning. Anyone pretending the wall wouldn't have an impact on illegal immigration is lying to themselves. Just like anyone who thinks the impact would justify the expense.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.
Holy fuck.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?
Thanks for the laugh.
not at all. dont give a fuck about the people
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?
You have to be kidding
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anything
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
Do you think more people would have crossed if there was no wall, or the exact same amount?
Think hard. It's a really difficult question.
Fewer. Now do the cost/benefit analysis like anyone should do before taking action.
Doesn't have quite the same shine after that IMO.
Exactly where I've been at from the beginning. Anyone pretending the wall wouldn't have an impact on illegal immigration is lying to themselves. Just like anyone who thinks the impact would justify the expense.
The awesomeness and the whining would justify double the expense.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Better plan
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
What about sanctuary states? Bomb them too? California’s sanctuary state law prohibits local law enforcement from using money and personnel to enforce federal immigration law. The law has been upheld and won’t be repealed. Just want make sure Riverside County troomps are prepared. Bombs away!1!!
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Better plan
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
What about sanctuary states? Bomb them too? California’s sanctuary state law prohibits local law enforcement from using money and personnel to enforce federal immigration law. The law has been upheld and won’t be repealed. Just want make sure Riverside County troomps are prepared. Bombs away!1!!
Once California secedes we? won't have an issue.
If the Nation of Cali likes their illegals they can keep them.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Better plan
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
What about sanctuary states? Bomb them too? California’s sanctuary state law prohibits local law enforcement from using money and personnel to enforce federal immigration law. The law has been upheld and won’t be repealed. Just want make sure Riverside County troomps are prepared. Bombs away!1!!
Once California secedes we? won't have an issue.
If the Nation of Cali likes their illegals they can keep them.
Sounds great. Independence and no bombing. If Riverside County was bombed into smithereens, getting to San Diego would be a lot more difficult. Dodged a bullet there.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Better plan
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
What about sanctuary states? Bomb them too? California’s sanctuary state law prohibits local law enforcement from using money and personnel to enforce federal immigration law. The law has been upheld and won’t be repealed. Just want make sure Riverside County troomps are prepared. Bombs away!1!!
Once California secedes we? won't have an issue.
If the Nation of Cali likes their illegals they can keep them.
Sounds great. Independence and no bombing. If Riverside County was bombed into smithereens, getting to San Diego would be a lot more difficult. Dodged a bullet there.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Better plan
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
What about sanctuary states? Bomb them too? California’s sanctuary state law prohibits local law enforcement from using money and personnel to enforce federal immigration law. The law has been upheld and won’t be repealed. Just want make sure Riverside County troomps are prepared. Bombs away!1!!
Riverside county cites as well as OC cities are OUT when it comes to sanctuary bullshit. We'll fight with the union troops when they come after the state's right racists. Same as it ever was
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Better plan
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
What about sanctuary states? Bomb them too? California’s sanctuary state law prohibits local law enforcement from using money and personnel to enforce federal immigration law. The law has been upheld and won’t be repealed. Just want make sure Riverside County troomps are prepared. Bombs away!1!!
Riverside county cites as well as OC cities are OUT when it comes to sanctuary bullshit. We'll fight with the union troops when they come after the state's right racists. Same as it ever was
Sounds like troomps are mustering a “resistance” movement to California sovereignty and law. The law is clear: in California cities cannot use public money, facilities or personnel to enforce trump bullshit. It’s been upheld by the federal courts. If you don’t like it, change the law. Otherwise, it will be enforced.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Better plan
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
What about sanctuary states? Bomb them too? California’s sanctuary state law prohibits local law enforcement from using money and personnel to enforce federal immigration law. The law has been upheld and won’t be repealed. Just want make sure Riverside County troomps are prepared. Bombs away!1!!
Riverside county cites as well as OC cities are OUT when it comes to sanctuary bullshit. We'll fight with the union troops when they come after the state's right racists. Same as it ever was
I'm going sovereign and then using that as leverage to gain water rights when we rejoin the union as Orange California. It's what the cattle barons would have done.
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Better plan
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
What about sanctuary states? Bomb them too? California’s sanctuary state law prohibits local law enforcement from using money and personnel to enforce federal immigration law. The law has been upheld and won’t be repealed. Just want make sure Riverside County troomps are prepared. Bombs away!1!!
Riverside county cites as well as OC cities are OUT when it comes to sanctuary bullshit. We'll fight with the union troops when they come after the state's right racists. Same as it ever was
Sounds like troomps are mustering a “resistance” movement to California sovereignty and law. The law is clear: in California cities cannot use public money, facilities or personnel to enforce trump bullshit. It’s been upheld by the federal courts. If you don’t like it, change the law. Otherwise, it will be enforced.
No it won't. You can find a federal judge to do anything these days but the US Constitution remains undefeated. State's rights are a relic of the slave holding south - you know, democrats
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Better plan
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
What about sanctuary states? Bomb them too? California’s sanctuary state law prohibits local law enforcement from using money and personnel to enforce federal immigration law. The law has been upheld and won’t be repealed. Just want make sure Riverside County troomps are prepared. Bombs away!1!!
Riverside county cites as well as OC cities are OUT when it comes to sanctuary bullshit. We'll fight with the union troops when they come after the state's right racists. Same as it ever was
Sounds like troomps are mustering a “resistance” movement to California sovereignty and law. The law is clear: in California cities cannot use public money, facilities or personnel to enforce trump bullshit. It’s been upheld by the federal courts. If you don’t like it, change the law. Otherwise, it will be enforced.
No it won't. You can find a federal judge to do anything these days but the US Constitution remains undefeated. State's rights are a relic of the slave holding south - you know, democrats
Trump’s losses in federal court are piling up. Sanctuary status is the law of the land. Federal funds California provides to subsidize freeloading rednecks cannot be withheld. California is undefeated.
"Most come in legally" might be the dumbest of all the lefts arguments.
Okay if 60 percent come in and overstay their visas, but we stop majority of the other 40 percent.....
Then that makes a huge fucking difference!!
"Most come in legally! What's the point of even trying to stop anyone at all!"
If you think building a wall will stop the other 40%, you are FS. You clearly have never been down by the border.
It makes it far far more difficult. Therefore allowing us to focus on the narrower scope of ways they can actually get in
Honestly if this weren't a bizarre political thing no one would disagree with it.
It's fucking absurd the lengths the left are going to with this.
I can't believe I even have to explain it.
Tunnels, ladders, ropes, boats, airplanes, explosives...these are just a few easy ways to deal with a wall. Throwing a shit ton of money at the wall to have it maybe stop less than 40% (and that’s a very generous estimate) is FS. They will just come another way.
okay so a bunch of poor miserable people traipsing through the desert carrying ladders and ropes and explosives.
Do you not see that the degree of difficulty is about a million times more?
And if they start blowing shit up it wont be hard to find and stop them.
Many will not attempt it. The ones that do now only have limited routes which can be monitored much more easily.
You can't be this fucking dense.
Just come out and say it. It's mean and a symbol of racism and you'll lose points with your friends if you admit that it will do somehting.
No. It’s outdated and ineffective. You think some immigrant family is gonna risk everything, but then give up simply because there is a bigger wall?
No. I think they are going to not go in the first place or go through a much more difficult, expensive, and less likely to be successful route.
They sure as fuck aren't gonna climb over it or blow it up.
I’m glad we agree that the wall does nothing to address the underlying issues.
Holy fuck.
Many would not attempt at all because of the difficulty/cost and then many others would not make it because of the difficulty.
The whole point of a wall is you cant just stroll through it!
Not to mention all these poor miserable fuckers in South/Central America that only hear about stuff second hand and get duped by the coyotes would definitely hear about a big ass wall and the extra difficulty.
So not only is it effective in general, it is a major deterrent too.
Now you care about the coyotes preying on the innocent?
Thanks for the laugh.
not at all. dont give a fuck about the people
I'm saying that most of what they hear comes from shady people who are trying to get their money and probably tell them how easy it is and how great it'll be.
So when they hear from legit sources that the US said fuck you latin american cunts it'll be a deterrent.
No it won’t. And you’re dumb if you think it will.
So if something is really difficult, and expensive, and they hear from credible sources that their chances of succeeding are much lower.....it won't deter anyone?
You have to be kidding
Your assumption that a wall makes their chances of success “much lower” is the root problem here. It won’t. It will change their approach. Nothing more. It’s an illusion and a waste of you think a wall solves anything
Yes. They will change their approach because the ways are more limited.
You know whats easier to monitor? Fewer routes.
The wall eliminates nothing. You just have to go over or under it. It’s not a magical barrier. Yeah they won’t be able to just stroll across, but so what. They will climb over or tunnel under like they already do. What resource does the wall free up for patrolling those other ways? None. It drains resources. I hope this helps but I know it won’t.
Berlin from 1962 to 1990 says "Hi."
Are we putting armed guards with shoot to kill orders everywhere? No. And people still got through.
But hey, any time you can take a page out of the East German/USSR playbook, you gotta do it.
Do you think more people would have crossed if there was no wall, or the exact same amount?
Think hard. It's a really difficult question.
Fewer. Now do the cost/benefit analysis like anyone should do before taking action.
Doesn't have quite the same shine after that IMO.
That isn't the argument I'm making.
Tommy is claiming that there is ZERO impact at all. None. 100 percent of people would bypass it.
Obviously how effective and is it worth the cost is the legit argument. Anyone with a brain realizes that. But he and his ilk have gone full on "LOL UR DUMB IT WONT STOP A SINGLE PERSON"
I said it wouldn’t stop the 40% you were claiming. You’re the one that walked it back to “If it stops one person it’s worth it for librul tears hehe” territory.
Comments
Tommy is claiming that there is ZERO impact at all. None. 100 percent of people would bypass it.
Obviously how effective and is it worth the cost is the legit argument. Anyone with a brain realizes that.
But he and his ilk have gone full on "LOL UR DUMB IT WONT STOP A SINGLE PERSON"
I just roll my eyes at the extent people go to claim walls don't work. Not a good look
An honest accounting of the cost of illegals is illuminating
The detainment, round up and transport back to the country an illegal came from.
Or use it to set up a vetting process to make those that have been here and are otherwise productive citizens to make them US Citizens and then enforce our border to the letter of the law with more border patrol.
With Sanctuary Cities and states being what they are, the 1st option would be the most effective as you can’t have amnesty when there are Sanctuary cities.
Spend the $25 billion to bomb sanctuary cities.
Everybody wins.
If the Nation of Cali likes their illegals they can keep them.
So you fucked.