There will be no impeachment without some evidence of a crime. — frank

Gotta agree, and it's going to have to be rock solid evidence of a serious crime, so that the Republican Senate has no choice but to convict. The next election will likely be here before any of that can happen. If Trump wins the next election, then we may need to start discussing things which are illegal to discuss. I have no idea what that could be, no idea at all, not even the slightest clue, it's a total mystery, but we may find ourselves there at some point.

An example of a useless erection is when you awake and gather the morning wood for the fire, erect that morning wood so it will rage when lit, but others have no immediate interest in it, so instead of it casting copiuos emissions, it just wanes, sputters, and sits uselessly. — Hanover

I suppose it would be a moron who would spend multi-billions of dollars on such an erection. The question I guess, is why wouldn't the border wall wane, sputter, and sit uselessly, as a useless erection?

I wonder what you would do with the Spanish president... He has secret meetings with Soros in the presidential palace, was invested with the votes of all fascist separatist parties (including the ETA party, Bildu) and the Pro-Venezuela communist party that is financed by Iran, Podemos; the Gibraltar strait is totally controlled by narcos and the military is not permitted to go and reestablish order; the number of pateras (boats with illegal immigrants from not-at-war countries like Morocco or Senegal) this year is higher than the previous eight years combined; he supports the Coup d´etat in Barcelona to divide the country into several smaller new nations controlled by fascist (literally fascist as they were born from the fascist movements in Europe, not fascist as progressive millennials use the term) organizations. He promotes its consolidation nationwide.

He paid for his PhD with an ad-hoc tribunal of friends and the people who actually wrote the thesis; he later used the fraud title of doctor to work as one. Half of his cabinet is proved to be involved in fraud, blackmail and other crimes; his deputy Carmen Calvo says that he´s not obliged to what he said before he enter office, quote: "since he was not president yet, so the Sánchez who said those things was a different man." He uses the presidential aircraft to go to concerts with friends. He promised to call elections the day he was elected, and he says now that he´s not even thinking of it. Economy is declining after several years of growth.

I suppose it would be a moron who would spend multi-billions of dollars on such an erection. The question I guess, is why wouldn't the border wall wane, sputter, and sit uselessly, as a useless erection? — Metaphysician Undercover

I'm told that in so-called third world countries millions if not billions of dollars worth of aid sit rusting for any number of reasons. I, myself, am completely persuaded that the wall - Trump's wall - does have a purpose, just not any purpose that a reasonable person would suppose that such a piece of hardware might be for.

I see in the news this date (29Dec2018) that Trump blames the deaths of two "separated" children in custody on Democrat immigration policies. If I had dog shit on the sole of my shoe, I would not wipe it off on Trump's face, for greater respect for the dog shit.

If yours is a country of laws, then the law is the right way to go. If your country is not a country of laws, then the question is the one Thomas Jefferson asked and answered in the US Declaration of Independence: whether to endure the endurable, or if it be unendurable, to revolt. If you're a Spaniard, you know as much and more than anyone the costs of civil war.

Please explain this: if the South wall has been being built since Bush senior´s years and most of if was erected with Obama why is such an issue that Trump wants to reinforce it and finish it? What´s the difference between the existing wall and the new plan? What do states that border Mexico (California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas) want?

I don´t understand what the problem is with the wall any ways; if it is conceived to protect better the southern border and prevent illegal traffic of goods and people in a very sensitive region of the world. Among the things that Trump promised, this one seems to belong with the small number of rational and wise ones. Do members of Congress who oppose the wall reform think that is not well designed or will not be enough to stop illegal immigration and smuggling at the border?

Now I'm pretty sure you're not an American, and certainly not one from the American southwest. There are places where a wall exists along the border between the US and Mexico, in cities, for the most part. That is, the current wall as it exists, the total of the pieces is some number of miles. I find on line that the length of the entire border is almost 2,000 miles, about 3,200 kilometers, most across a very difficult desert/mountain wilderness; the border itself is in many places defined by the Rio Grande River.

By comparison, the Franco-Spanish border (from online) is about 410 miles, or about 650 kilometers. How practical would it be to keep the French out of Spain (or vice versa) if, say, the french had multiple compelling reasons for coming across, by building a wall the length of the border? Keeping in mind that border is probably not even remotely as difficult and formidable and inaccessible as the US-Mexico border.

And we have in hand an example of what individuals will do to escape harm: persons in the World Trade Center chose to jump - to certain and horrific death - to avoid the fire. Do you imagine that person of similar conviction will be kept out by a wall?

And as to the problem of illegal immigration it is widely reported that most illegal immigrants come by commercial airliner

But there is a deeper lesson here about current American politics. If Trump says it, also if many Republicans say it, it - whatever it is - simply has nothing whatsoever to do with the truth. What they say is not a function of truth. It all has some other reason. And it's clear that unless policed somehow, truth suffers in every practical sense.

Do you imagine that person of similar conviction will be kept out by a wall? -Tim Wood. Okay, it does has a deterrent effect, proved by the fact that the wall built so far has provoked a reduction of traffic and the traffic that exists goes to dangerous areas without any wall. On the other hand, a wall it´s not just the physical construction, it is also all the defences implemented to protect it: police force, weaponized drones, surveillance etc. The illegals and drug dealers that come by commercial airliners can be dealt with very differently, because no humanitary catastrophes are associated with regular flights unless the aircraft crashes or is hijacked. The wall´s humanitary purpose is to end the "cross or die" lethal contest, and to end a very strategic source of income for the maras that control and terrorise Mexico; something that Mexicans should be very grateful for.

I can´t help thinking that what is wrong with the wall is that "evil" Trump wants to build it. If Obama wanted to build it, many protesters would at least stop and think if the wall is a good idea or not.

have no idea what that could be, no idea at all, not even the slightest clue, it's a total mystery, but we may find ourselves there at some point. — Jake

As long as it doesn't involve bloodshed. Maybe a cell at Guantanamo.