Ted Cruz introduces "EL CHAPO Act" to pay for the wall

[toomuchtime_]

Ted Cruz has sold out. A wall is a waste of money and conservatives should be against it when it can be done more cheaply. That money should go to reduce the deficit.

The wall is a part of the solution and no one can find a reasonable solution to illegals crossing that border without it. It is conservatives who oppose the wall who have sold out.

How about get rid of incentive? Dems wanting them for votes and repubs giving them amnesty and free healthcare and shit. We wouldn't need a fucking wall if we didn't give them incentive!
Go after CAUSES, not EFFECTS.

Go after both.

Wasteful. If you eliminated the cause, there would be no effects.

It is foolish to imagine you can completely remove all the incentives for illegals to come here. The federal government can only implement E-verify for a small portion of the economy and the states must agree to implement it for the rest of the economy, so the effort to eliminate all incentives would first have to go through years and years of legislative battles in Washington and the state legislatures and then years and year of judicial challenges all over the country and then there will be substantial parts of the country that will continue to refuse to implement it. In the meantime, illegals will continue to cross the border almost at will.

Done properly, barriers work. A proper barrier with beefed border patrols will end the flow of illegals across our southern border, and with stepped up enforcement to deport those already here, steady progress can be made to reduce our illegal immigrant problems to no more than a nuisance. I agree with you that we should try to remove the incentives, but as a practical matter it can only be part of the solution.

 

[danielpalos]

Senator Ted Cruz wants to use assets seized from drug lords such as El Chapo, the Mexican kingpin who was recently extradited to the U.S., to pay for border security and the border wall.

• The idea: U.S. prosecutors are seeking $14 billion in drug profits and other assets from El Chapo. They also routinely seize the assets of other drug dealers and traffickers.
• The Cruz quote: "Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border."
• The acronym's meaning: Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order
• Why it matters: President Trump is trying to figure out how to pay for his border wall, which will require American taxpayers to front the bill, but Republicans aren't helping at the moment.

Ted Cruz introduces "EL CHAPO Act" to pay for the wall

Great idea.

Maybe, in right wing fantasy. We have a Commerce Clause. The tax position of the right wing, is that we can lower taxes.

Everybody knows, the common offense and general warfare require wartime tax rates.

 

[TNHarley]

Ted Cruz has sold out. A wall is a waste of money and conservatives should be against it when it can be done more cheaply. That money should go to reduce the deficit.

The wall is a part of the solution and no one can find a reasonable solution to illegals crossing that border without it. It is conservatives who oppose the wall who have sold out.

How about get rid of incentive? Dems wanting them for votes and repubs giving them amnesty and free healthcare and shit. We wouldn't need a fucking wall if we didn't give them incentive!
Go after CAUSES, not EFFECTS.

Go after both.

Wasteful. If you eliminated the cause, there would be no effects.

It is foolish to imagine you can completely remove all the incentives for illegals to come here. The federal government can only implement E-verify for a small portion of the economy and the states must agree to implement it for the rest of the economy, so the effort to eliminate all incentives would first have to go through years and years of legislative battles in Washington and the state legislatures and then years and year of judicial challenges all over the country and then there will be substantial parts of the country that will continue to refuse to implement it. In the meantime, illegals will continue to cross the border almost at will.

Done properly, barriers work. A proper barrier with beefed border patrols will end the flow of illegals across our southern border, and with stepped up enforcement to deport those already here, steady progress can be made to reduce our illegal immigrant problems to no more than a nuisance. I agree with you that we should try to remove the incentives, but as a practical matter it can only be part of the solution.

Congress can mandate it.
Also, I wasn't just talking about that. I want no more amnesty, no more ER, no more schooling, no more anything. I would also like to fine the shit out of landlords, real estate etc for renting or selling dwellings.

 

[toomuchtime_]

The wall is a part of the solution and no one can find a reasonable solution to illegals crossing that border without it. It is conservatives who oppose the wall who have sold out.

How about get rid of incentive? Dems wanting them for votes and repubs giving them amnesty and free healthcare and shit. We wouldn't need a fucking wall if we didn't give them incentive!
Go after CAUSES, not EFFECTS.

Go after both.

Wasteful. If you eliminated the cause, there would be no effects.

It is foolish to imagine you can completely remove all the incentives for illegals to come here. The federal government can only implement E-verify for a small portion of the economy and the states must agree to implement it for the rest of the economy, so the effort to eliminate all incentives would first have to go through years and years of legislative battles in Washington and the state legislatures and then years and year of judicial challenges all over the country and then there will be substantial parts of the country that will continue to refuse to implement it. In the meantime, illegals will continue to cross the border almost at will.

Done properly, barriers work. A proper barrier with beefed border patrols will end the flow of illegals across our southern border, and with stepped up enforcement to deport those already here, steady progress can be made to reduce our illegal immigrant problems to no more than a nuisance. I agree with you that we should try to remove the incentives, but as a practical matter it can only be part of the solution.

Congress can mandate it.
Also, I wasn't just talking about that. I want no more amnesty, no more ER, no more schooling, no more anything. I would also like to fine the shit out of landlords, real estate etc for renting or selling dwellings.

The problem is Congress doesn't have the power to do all of these things. The state governments have to agree. In principle I agree with you, but as a practical matter it can be only a part of the solution and then only in some states. That's why it is necessary to try to seal the border to try to reduce the illegal immigrant problem.

 

[TNHarley]

How about get rid of incentive? Dems wanting them for votes and repubs giving them amnesty and free healthcare and shit. We wouldn't need a fucking wall if we didn't give them incentive!
Go after CAUSES, not EFFECTS.

Go after both.

Wasteful. If you eliminated the cause, there would be no effects.

It is foolish to imagine you can completely remove all the incentives for illegals to come here. The federal government can only implement E-verify for a small portion of the economy and the states must agree to implement it for the rest of the economy, so the effort to eliminate all incentives would first have to go through years and years of legislative battles in Washington and the state legislatures and then years and year of judicial challenges all over the country and then there will be substantial parts of the country that will continue to refuse to implement it. In the meantime, illegals will continue to cross the border almost at will.

Done properly, barriers work. A proper barrier with beefed border patrols will end the flow of illegals across our southern border, and with stepped up enforcement to deport those already here, steady progress can be made to reduce our illegal immigrant problems to no more than a nuisance. I agree with you that we should try to remove the incentives, but as a practical matter it can only be part of the solution.

Congress can mandate it.
Also, I wasn't just talking about that. I want no more amnesty, no more ER, no more schooling, no more anything. I would also like to fine the shit out of landlords, real estate etc for renting or selling dwellings.

The problem is Congress doesn't have the power to do all of these things. The state governments have to agree. In principle I agree with you, but as a practical matter it can be only a part of the solution and then only in some states. That's why it is necessary to try to seal the border to try to reduce the illegal immigrant problem.

Congress can do those things, actually. They would just have to come together. They have tried to mandate everify on several occasions but asshole democrats, republicans and the chamber of commerce don't want it.

 

[Preacher]

Of course the leftist anti Americans don't want this...EVENTUALLY they will admit what everyone already knows,that they WANT illegal immigration because they NEED that voting bloc....lost white working class,will lose blacks and latino's more and more as time passes and economy improves under President Trump so they NEED illegals who they can pile up with food stamps and TANF and medicaid even more benefits WE pay for.

 

[edthecynic]

Senator Ted Cruz wants to use assets seized from drug lords such as El Chapo, the Mexican kingpin who was recently extradited to the U.S., to pay for border security and the border wall.

• The idea: U.S. prosecutors are seeking $14 billion in drug profits and other assets from El Chapo. They also routinely seize the assets of other drug dealers and traffickers.
• The Cruz quote: "Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border."
• The acronym's meaning: Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order
• Why it matters: President Trump is trying to figure out how to pay for his border wall, which will require American taxpayers to front the bill, but Republicans aren't helping at the moment.

Ted Cruz introduces "EL CHAPO Act" to pay for the wall

Except El Chapo has nowhere near $14 billion! The most he has ever been estimated to have is $1.4 billion, none of which has been seized by the US government yet, but what is a lousy decimal point in Right-wing fuzzy math land.

So you agree with the bill in principle but believe the funds the US prosecutors are mistaken about how much money he has. The good news for you is that the title of the bill is an acronym for Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order, and that it will include all funds recovered from other drug dealers and traffickers. I hope that will put your decimal point anxieties to rest.

I would rather the money go to something actually useful, like drug addiction treatment than pissed away on a worthless useless Russian type wall.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Go after both.

Wasteful. If you eliminated the cause, there would be no effects.

It is foolish to imagine you can completely remove all the incentives for illegals to come here. The federal government can only implement E-verify for a small portion of the economy and the states must agree to implement it for the rest of the economy, so the effort to eliminate all incentives would first have to go through years and years of legislative battles in Washington and the state legislatures and then years and year of judicial challenges all over the country and then there will be substantial parts of the country that will continue to refuse to implement it. In the meantime, illegals will continue to cross the border almost at will.

Done properly, barriers work. A proper barrier with beefed border patrols will end the flow of illegals across our southern border, and with stepped up enforcement to deport those already here, steady progress can be made to reduce our illegal immigrant problems to no more than a nuisance. I agree with you that we should try to remove the incentives, but as a practical matter it can only be part of the solution.

Congress can mandate it.
Also, I wasn't just talking about that. I want no more amnesty, no more ER, no more schooling, no more anything. I would also like to fine the shit out of landlords, real estate etc for renting or selling dwellings.

The problem is Congress doesn't have the power to do all of these things. The state governments have to agree. In principle I agree with you, but as a practical matter it can be only a part of the solution and then only in some states. That's why it is necessary to try to seal the border to try to reduce the illegal immigrant problem.

Congress can do those things, actually. They would just have to come together. They have tried to mandate everify on several occasions but asshole democrats, republicans and the chamber of commerce don't want it.

Actually, Congress can't. E-verify has been law since 1997, but it only applies to federal contractors and while some states have passed laws requiring all employers to use it, some have not.

"In 2011, California passed an act to prohibit municipalities from mandating use of E-Verify.[28] At least 20 municipalities had required use of E-Verify,[29] for all businesses and/or companies doing business with the local government, including Mission Viejo[30] (2007), Temecula[31][32] (ordinance 5.06.030) (2010), Murrieta[33][34][35] (ordinance Chapter 5.04) (2010), Riverside,[36]Santa Maria[37][38] (only for city employees), Lake Elsinore[39] (Ordinance No. 1279)[40] (2010), Wildomar[41] (only for contractors) (2010), Lancaster[42] (Ordinance No. 934), Palmdale, San Clemente, Escondido, Menifee, Hemet, San Juan Capistrano, Hesperia, Norco, San Bernardino County, Rancho Santa Margarita, and Simi Valley.[29]

Cities considering E-Verify ordinances for businesses for 2011 are Costa Mesa,[43] San Luis Obispo, Santa Maria[44] (for all businesses) Santa Barbara, and San Jose. However, Costa Mesa[45][46][47] is the only city that has adapted the same state law as Arizona's SB-1070, allowing the City to arrest those without proper identification of resident status under suspicion of being unlawfully present in the United States."

E-Verify - Wikipedia

 

[TNHarley]

Wasteful. If you eliminated the cause, there would be no effects.

It is foolish to imagine you can completely remove all the incentives for illegals to come here. The federal government can only implement E-verify for a small portion of the economy and the states must agree to implement it for the rest of the economy, so the effort to eliminate all incentives would first have to go through years and years of legislative battles in Washington and the state legislatures and then years and year of judicial challenges all over the country and then there will be substantial parts of the country that will continue to refuse to implement it. In the meantime, illegals will continue to cross the border almost at will.

Done properly, barriers work. A proper barrier with beefed border patrols will end the flow of illegals across our southern border, and with stepped up enforcement to deport those already here, steady progress can be made to reduce our illegal immigrant problems to no more than a nuisance. I agree with you that we should try to remove the incentives, but as a practical matter it can only be part of the solution.

Congress can mandate it.
Also, I wasn't just talking about that. I want no more amnesty, no more ER, no more schooling, no more anything. I would also like to fine the shit out of landlords, real estate etc for renting or selling dwellings.

The problem is Congress doesn't have the power to do all of these things. The state governments have to agree. In principle I agree with you, but as a practical matter it can be only a part of the solution and then only in some states. That's why it is necessary to try to seal the border to try to reduce the illegal immigrant problem.

Congress can do those things, actually. They would just have to come together. They have tried to mandate everify on several occasions but asshole democrats, republicans and the chamber of commerce don't want it.

Actually, Congress can't. E-verify has been law since 1997, but it only applies to federal contractors and while some states have passed laws requiring all employers to use it, some have not.

"In 2011, California passed an act to prohibit municipalities from mandating use of E-Verify.[28] At least 20 municipalities had required use of E-Verify,[29] for all businesses and/or companies doing business with the local government, including Mission Viejo[30] (2007), Temecula[31][32] (ordinance 5.06.030) (2010), Murrieta[33][34][35] (ordinance Chapter 5.04) (2010), Riverside,[36]Santa Maria[37][38] (only for city employees), Lake Elsinore[39] (Ordinance No. 1279)[40] (2010), Wildomar[41] (only for contractors) (2010), Lancaster[42] (Ordinance No. 934), Palmdale, San Clemente, Escondido, Menifee, Hemet, San Juan Capistrano, Hesperia, Norco, San Bernardino County, Rancho Santa Margarita, and Simi Valley.[29]

Cities considering E-Verify ordinances for businesses for 2011 are Costa Mesa,[43] San Luis Obispo, Santa Maria[44] (for all businesses) Santa Barbara, and San Jose. However, Costa Mesa[45][46][47] is the only city that has adapted the same state law as Arizona's SB-1070, allowing the City to arrest those without proper identification of resident status under suspicion of being unlawfully present in the United States."

E-Verify - Wikipedia

Yes, Congress can. They have tried multiple times but the corporatists don't want anything to do with it.
Its kind of absurd to think congress couldn't mandate everify..

 

[brummelben]

Senator Ted Cruz wants to use assets seized from drug lords such as El Chapo, the Mexican kingpin who was recently extradited to the U.S., to pay for border security and the border wall.

• The idea: U.S. prosecutors are seeking $14 billion in drug profits and other assets from El Chapo. They also routinely seize the assets of other drug dealers and traffickers.
• The Cruz quote: "Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border."
• The acronym's meaning: Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order
• Why it matters: President Trump is trying to figure out how to pay for his border wall, which will require American taxpayers to front the bill, but Republicans aren't helping at the moment.

Ted Cruz introduces "EL CHAPO Act" to pay for the wall

Great idea.

Most of us will be happy to have the wall built, but only after Mexico sends us a check for payment in full, as Trump promised would happen

 

[toomuchtime_]

Senator Ted Cruz wants to use assets seized from drug lords such as El Chapo, the Mexican kingpin who was recently extradited to the U.S., to pay for border security and the border wall.

• The idea: U.S. prosecutors are seeking $14 billion in drug profits and other assets from El Chapo. They also routinely seize the assets of other drug dealers and traffickers.
• The Cruz quote: "Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border."
• The acronym's meaning: Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order
• Why it matters: President Trump is trying to figure out how to pay for his border wall, which will require American taxpayers to front the bill, but Republicans aren't helping at the moment.

Ted Cruz introduces "EL CHAPO Act" to pay for the wall

Except El Chapo has nowhere near $14 billion! The most he has ever been estimated to have is $1.4 billion, none of which has been seized by the US government yet, but what is a lousy decimal point in Right-wing fuzzy math land.

So you agree with the bill in principle but believe the funds the US prosecutors are mistaken about how much money he has. The good news for you is that the title of the bill is an acronym for Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order, and that it will include all funds recovered from other drug dealers and traffickers. I hope that will put your decimal point anxieties to rest.

I would rather the money go to something actually useful, like drug addiction treatment than pissed away on a worthless useless Russian type wall.

Does Russia have wall? I mean in the real world, not just in your fantasies.

 

[brummelben]

Ted Cruz has sold out. A wall is a waste of money and conservatives should be against it when it can be done more cheaply. That money should go to reduce the deficit.

The wall is a part of the solution and no one can find a reasonable solution to illegals crossing that border without it. It is conservatives who oppose the wall who have sold out.

There are plenty of people who have cheaper solutions and they can be implemented more quickly. Rudy Guliani has talked about how we can secure our borders without a wall. Again the government only controls around 30% of the land necessary for this. So-called conservatives who support a wall are phonies.

So, you don't know of any other way to secure our border? Whether it is a solid wall or a high tech fence, such barriers do work and no one has specified how they would prevent illegals from crossing our southern border without such a barrier.

40%+ of those illegally in this country do not enter through our southern border. Just one more reason why this would be a complete waste of our money

 

[TNHarley]

Senator Ted Cruz wants to use assets seized from drug lords such as El Chapo, the Mexican kingpin who was recently extradited to the U.S., to pay for border security and the border wall.

• The idea: U.S. prosecutors are seeking $14 billion in drug profits and other assets from El Chapo. They also routinely seize the assets of other drug dealers and traffickers.
• The Cruz quote: "Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border."
• The acronym's meaning: Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order
• Why it matters: President Trump is trying to figure out how to pay for his border wall, which will require American taxpayers to front the bill, but Republicans aren't helping at the moment.

Ted Cruz introduces "EL CHAPO Act" to pay for the wall

Great idea.

Most of us will be happy to have the wall built, but only after Mexico sends us a check for payment in full, as Trump promised would happen

link?

 

[danielpalos]

The wall is a part of the solution and no one can find a reasonable solution to illegals crossing that border without it. It is conservatives who oppose the wall who have sold out.

How about get rid of incentive? Dems wanting them for votes and repubs giving them amnesty and free healthcare and shit. We wouldn't need a fucking wall if we didn't give them incentive!
Go after CAUSES, not EFFECTS.

Go after both.

Wasteful. If you eliminated the cause, there would be no effects.

It is foolish to imagine you can completely remove all the incentives for illegals to come here. The federal government can only implement E-verify for a small portion of the economy and the states must agree to implement it for the rest of the economy, so the effort to eliminate all incentives would first have to go through years and years of legislative battles in Washington and the state legislatures and then years and year of judicial challenges all over the country and then there will be substantial parts of the country that will continue to refuse to implement it. In the meantime, illegals will continue to cross the border almost at will.

Done properly, barriers work. A proper barrier with beefed border patrols will end the flow of illegals across our southern border, and with stepped up enforcement to deport those already here, steady progress can be made to reduce our illegal immigrant problems to no more than a nuisance. I agree with you that we should try to remove the incentives, but as a practical matter it can only be part of the solution.

Congress can mandate it.
Also, I wasn't just talking about that. I want no more amnesty, no more ER, no more schooling, no more anything. I would also like to fine the shit out of landlords, real estate etc for renting or selling dwellings.

ban natural rights for some? what a start.

 

[TNHarley]

Ted Cruz has sold out. A wall is a waste of money and conservatives should be against it when it can be done more cheaply. That money should go to reduce the deficit.

The wall is a part of the solution and no one can find a reasonable solution to illegals crossing that border without it. It is conservatives who oppose the wall who have sold out.

There are plenty of people who have cheaper solutions and they can be implemented more quickly. Rudy Guliani has talked about how we can secure our borders without a wall. Again the government only controls around 30% of the land necessary for this. So-called conservatives who support a wall are phonies.

So, you don't know of any other way to secure our border? Whether it is a solid wall or a high tech fence, such barriers do work and no one has specified how they would prevent illegals from crossing our southern border without such a barrier.

40%+ of those illegally in this country do not enter through our southern border. Just one more reason why this would be a complete waste of our money

the leftist position on welfare helps about the same amount but you guys don't mind forcing us to pay for shit.
How important is 40%?

 

[TNHarley]

How about get rid of incentive? Dems wanting them for votes and repubs giving them amnesty and free healthcare and shit. We wouldn't need a fucking wall if we didn't give them incentive!
Go after CAUSES, not EFFECTS.

Go after both.

Wasteful. If you eliminated the cause, there would be no effects.

It is foolish to imagine you can completely remove all the incentives for illegals to come here. The federal government can only implement E-verify for a small portion of the economy and the states must agree to implement it for the rest of the economy, so the effort to eliminate all incentives would first have to go through years and years of legislative battles in Washington and the state legislatures and then years and year of judicial challenges all over the country and then there will be substantial parts of the country that will continue to refuse to implement it. In the meantime, illegals will continue to cross the border almost at will.

Done properly, barriers work. A proper barrier with beefed border patrols will end the flow of illegals across our southern border, and with stepped up enforcement to deport those already here, steady progress can be made to reduce our illegal immigrant problems to no more than a nuisance. I agree with you that we should try to remove the incentives, but as a practical matter it can only be part of the solution.

Congress can mandate it.
Also, I wasn't just talking about that. I want no more amnesty, no more ER, no more schooling, no more anything. I would also like to fine the shit out of landlords, real estate etc for renting or selling dwellings.

ban natural rights for some? what a start.

what is a natural right?

 

[brummelben]

Senator Ted Cruz wants to use assets seized from drug lords such as El Chapo, the Mexican kingpin who was recently extradited to the U.S., to pay for border security and the border wall.

• The idea: U.S. prosecutors are seeking $14 billion in drug profits and other assets from El Chapo. They also routinely seize the assets of other drug dealers and traffickers.
• The Cruz quote: "Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border."
• The acronym's meaning: Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order
• Why it matters: President Trump is trying to figure out how to pay for his border wall, which will require American taxpayers to front the bill, but Republicans aren't helping at the moment.

Ted Cruz introduces "EL CHAPO Act" to pay for the wall

Great idea.

Most of us will be happy to have the wall built, but only after Mexico sends us a check for payment in full, as Trump promised would happen

link?

Link to what?

 

[brummelben]

Ted Cruz has sold out. A wall is a waste of money and conservatives should be against it when it can be done more cheaply. That money should go to reduce the deficit.

The wall is a part of the solution and no one can find a reasonable solution to illegals crossing that border without it. It is conservatives who oppose the wall who have sold out.

There are plenty of people who have cheaper solutions and they can be implemented more quickly. Rudy Guliani has talked about how we can secure our borders without a wall. Again the government only controls around 30% of the land necessary for this. So-called conservatives who support a wall are phonies.

So, you don't know of any other way to secure our border? Whether it is a solid wall or a high tech fence, such barriers do work and no one has specified how they would prevent illegals from crossing our southern border without such a barrier.

40%+ of those illegally in this country do not enter through our southern border. Just one more reason why this would be a complete waste of our money

the leftist position on welfare helps about the same amount but you guys don't mind forcing us to pay for shit.
How important is 40%?

The 40% of illegals who don't enter through the southern border? You figure that out

 

[TNHarley]

Senator Ted Cruz wants to use assets seized from drug lords such as El Chapo, the Mexican kingpin who was recently extradited to the U.S., to pay for border security and the border wall.

• The idea: U.S. prosecutors are seeking $14 billion in drug profits and other assets from El Chapo. They also routinely seize the assets of other drug dealers and traffickers.
• The Cruz quote: "Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border."
• The acronym's meaning: Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order
• Why it matters: President Trump is trying to figure out how to pay for his border wall, which will require American taxpayers to front the bill, but Republicans aren't helping at the moment.

Ted Cruz introduces "EL CHAPO Act" to pay for the wall

Great idea.

Most of us will be happy to have the wall built, but only after Mexico sends us a check for payment in full, as Trump promised would happen

link?

Link to what?

only after Mexico sends us a check for payment in full, as Trump promised would happen

 

[brummelben]

Senator Ted Cruz wants to use assets seized from drug lords such as El Chapo, the Mexican kingpin who was recently extradited to the U.S., to pay for border security and the border wall.

• The idea: U.S. prosecutors are seeking $14 billion in drug profits and other assets from El Chapo. They also routinely seize the assets of other drug dealers and traffickers.
• The Cruz quote: "Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border."
• The acronym's meaning: Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order
• Why it matters: President Trump is trying to figure out how to pay for his border wall, which will require American taxpayers to front the bill, but Republicans aren't helping at the moment.

Ted Cruz introduces "EL CHAPO Act" to pay for the wall

Great idea.

Most of us will be happy to have the wall built, but only after Mexico sends us a check for payment in full, as Trump promised would happen

link?

Link to what?

only after Mexico sends us a check for payment in full, as Trump promised would happen

Are you saying that Trump never promised that Mexico would pay for the wall?