Kirsters Baish| President Donald Trump’s much anticipated border wall between the southern border of the United States and Mexico is estimated to set the United States back around $20-$30 billion, which will likely see some fluctuation due to inflation, which is the case with most government projects. While $20-$30 billion sounds like a lot of money, but as Conservative Tribune explains, “in the milieu of modern American government, where foreign aid for a single year can approach the lower reaches of that budget, it’s actually quite modest.”
You’re probably wondering why it’s so hard for the President to get funding for a wall that so many Americans support.
Reuters reported that head Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer claimed back in March, when President Trump was looking at prototypes of the wall in California, that the wall costs too much stating, “Our view on the wall as something that is ineffectual and expensive has not changed.”
Schumer supported the idea of a borer wall back in 2006… when border security was an item on the Democratic agenda. Abolishing ICE was definitely not. Conservative Tribune poses the question, “since when does a party which considers $20 billion of taxpayer money to be pocket change suddenly care so much about spending that money in a way that will arguably save taxpayers far more over the life of the project?”
Conservative actor turned expert Twitter troll James Woods sent out a tweet with one tweet.
He posted an image of the words, “President Trump can’t seem to get $20 billion for a wall. So how did Obama come up with $150 billion to give Iran?”
He wrote as the caption, “So, riddle me this…”
So, riddle me this… pic.twitter.com/RWeQijszsD
— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) July 28, 2018
It’s important to note that the $150 billion that the actor is referring to in his tweet is Iranian assets that were frozen by sanctions… which the Obama administration then unfroze during the Iran deal.
Under the law as it sits today, there is no set way to use those funds, unless in a state of war. But, the money didn’t need to go back to Iran, that’s for sure.
Conservative Tribune explains:
There’s no court that the United States recognizes as having authority over the president’s ability to freeze foreign funds — either within America or internationally. And, while the government couldn’t use the money, necessarily, the money could have been saved for the Iranian people if and when the mullahs in Tehran are toppled.
That definitely would have been a better use of that money than what actually happened.
When Trump backed out of the Iran deal, former Bush administration official James Robbins wrote in USA Today that the deal “did nothing to hamper Tehran’s support for terrorism and insurgency. In fact, the up to $150 billion in Iranian assets the deal unfroze has probably helped underwrite the country’s recent military adventurism in Syria and elsewhere.”
One of the biggest issues with the Iran deal was the fact that it was simply a handing off of a large sum of money to a country who is planning on using that money to fund terrorist organizations and beefing up their military. This isn’t something Americans should be supporting.
While you may believe that the two numbers don’t have anything to do with one another, they do. Democrats are constantly willing to make decisions that put America’s security at risk. This is true in both of these cases.
It’s too expensive to build a border wall to protect American citizens when it’s a Conservative idea. Keep in mind that this border wall is estimated to cost between $20-$30 billion. But, when it comes to handing over $150 billion to Iran, where the President went on to threaten war on the U.S., the Democrats are okay with it.
Riddle me that.