I overheard the following conversation while having coffee the other day:
Don: It’s good to see you again, Bill, I ‘m looking forward to your views on Trump’s latest political involvement. What’s going to happen following the Mueller report and the Democrat’s continuing investigation?
Bill: As long as the Democrats get by with their harassment, they will continue to thwart the president’s efforts to help solve the problems facing America.
Don: If the Mueller report doesn’t show any illegal activity by the president, can the Democrats say an expanded investigation is called for in order find out what the president has done that should be part of the record.
Bill: You wouldn’t think so. That report is to go to the attorney general’s office, and they, in turn, issue the final report. That should end it.
Don: How about the “wall,” any thoughts about what should be done there?
Bill: I wonder how much the “wall” will really cost. If a reasonable stretch of it were built in a high in-flux area and there was no “wall” a 100 miles away, what would be the comparative costs of controlling the entrants into the U.S. The money saved could reduce the expenditure considerably. Ever since the first call to “circle the wagons” the U.S. has had a fondness for walls, including the walls for gated communities and private dwellings. They won’t be a permanent answer, but they could serve as a good stop-gap measure
Don: That sounds like a good plan, Bill, to reduce the cost of the wall would certainly make it more attractive, especially if it is shown it can also be built in much less time as was proposed by a North Dakota group. There may be other suggestions that could reduce the time and cost of the project. Let’s plan to meet again to see what suggestions we and others might make.
Bob Johnson, Bismarck