[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

It's now or never.

[Ohioan]

Your sense of urgency is well placed.

[GOPJ]

Trump and the American people will get our Wall... maybe not tomorrow, but before Trump’s term is up. He’s NOT a quitter - have faith...

[Lurkinanloomin]

The wall/fence/barrier is important, but equally important is restoring the rule of law.
Just removing the illegal aliens already caught and convicted of other crimes will leave us with millions upon millions of other illegal aliens who just haven’t been caught and convicted of anything else yet.
There are NO “law-abiding” illegal aliens.
ALL illegal aliens MUST commit multiple crimes DAILY to continue their illegal presence.
The simplest are illegal employment, fraudulent documents and benefit fraud.
Many are driving without license and insurance and many are driving drunk.
We should not have to wait until they harm or kill Americans before they are removed.

ALL illegal aliens ARE subject to removal and should be detained and removed WHENEVER they come to the attention of ANY law enforcement. That’s what real countries do.

No elected official should be protecting illegal aliens from our laws, including President Trump.
The illegal DACA program must be ended.
One cannot criticize sanctuary cities for protecting illegal aliens from our laws while supporting DACA that does the same thing.

[Yosemitest]

Supreme Court Justices or any Federal Judge:

Read Professor Prakash and Professor Smith's accompanying Pocket Part essay, Removing Federal Judges WITHOUT Impeachment.
Here's the abstract:
Saikrishna Prakash and Steven D. Smith
116 Yale L.J. 72 (2006)

Most everyone assumes that impeachment is the only means of removing federal judges
and that the Constitution's grant of good-behavior tenure is an implicit reference to impeachment.
This Article challenges that conventional wisdom.
Using evidence from England, the colonies, and the revolutionary state constitutions, the Article demonstrates that at the Founding, good-behavior tenure and impeachment had only the most tenuous of relationships.
Good-behavior tenure was forfeitable upon a judicial finding of misbehavior.
There would have to be a trial, the hearing of witnesses, and the introduction of evidence, with misbehavior proved by the party seeking to oust the tenured individual.
Contrary to what many might suppose, judges were not the only ones who could be granted good-behavior tenure.
Anything that might be held--land, licenses, employment, etc.--could be granted during good behavior, and private parties could grant good-behavior tenure to other private individuals.
Impeachment, by contrast, referred to a criminal procedure conducted in the legislature that could lead to an array of criminal sanctions.
In England and in the colonies, impeachment was never seen as a means of judging whether someone with good-behavior tenure had forfeited her tenure by reason of misbehavior.
Whether a landholder, employee, or government officer with good-behavior tenure had misbehaved would be determined in the ordinary courts of law.
Moreover, the vast majority of state constitutions did not equate good-behavior tenure with impeachment either.
To the contrary, many distinguished them explicitly.
Taken together, these propositions devastate the conventional conflation of good-behavior tenure with impeachment.
More importantly, they indicate that the original Constitution did NOT render impeachment THE ONLY possible means of removing federal judges with good-behavior tenure.
Given the long tradition of adjudicating misbehavior in the ordinary courts,
Congress may enact necessary and proper legislation permitting the removal of federal judges upon a finding of misbehavior in the ordinary courts of law.

[deport]

The southern border is important and it is one of the entry points that need to be addressed.
Approximately 40% of our illegals come in by air and over stay their visas, etc. Once
in they mingle and become established and our gov't doesn't remove them. Asia/China
is the source of many of this 40%