On how much wall:
Aug. 2015
Reporter: How are you going to build a 1,900-mile wall?
Trump: Very easy. I’m a builder. That’s easy. I build buildings that are — can I tell you what’s more complicated? What’s more complicated is building a building that’s 95 stories tall. O.K.?
--
News conference in Dubuque, Iowa
Dec. 2015
In our case, we need really 1,000 miles. It’s 2,000 miles, but some is natural borders, natural barriers which are pretty good, not as good as the wall but pretty good; you know what, let’s use it.
--
Campaign rally in Manassas, Va.
On how much it'd cost:
On how tall the wall'd be:
- Jan 2016: "Taller than the Great Wall of China [GWC]"
- Feb 9, 2016: 35 - 40 feet
- Feb 12, 2016: ten feet higher than he'd previously declared, not that it's clear what that prior height specifically was.
- Mar 3, 2016: In one conversation/debate: 50 feet, 45 feet and 40 feet.
- Mar 30, 2016: 35 feet, and getting higher all the time.
- Jan 2018:
"If you have a wall this thick and it’s solid concrete from ground to 32 feet high, which is a high wall, much higher than people planned. You go 32 feet up and you don’t know who’s over here. You’re here, you’ve got the wall and there’s some other people here."
His choices for getting a wall built are few to none now that he's shown his word is worthless and his "wall" specs are incoherent.
As recently as
December 31, 2018, Trump wrote:
"An all concrete Wall was NEVER ABANDONED, as has been reported by the media."
An "all concrete" wall won't gain funding, not from Dems or GOP-ers. Neither will Mexico fund it, which is another feature the wall is supposed to have; indeed that attribute was one that, even when challenged regarding its implausibility, he maintained he was sharp and able enough to get Mexico do pay because he was a far more capable negotiator than anyone else who was running for POTUS.
He later
redefined what "Mexico will pay" means, making it a figurative assertion and saying he'd use
policy changes to get Mexico to pay. In January 2017, he
proposed using the tax reform bill (presumably the TCJA) to get Mexico to pay, but in August 2017, it was "
one way or another." He's also
indicated Mexico would pay via NAFTA, a treaty he aims to cancel. And, of course, there's this: "
It’s an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year." What's Trump done to block the remittances? Nothing.
Trump, rather than clearly and unequivocally stating what exactly, even on basic details, he wants funded and then sticking to that, has vacillated to and fro. Just ten days before the above statement, Trump said his wall could be
"artistically beautiful" steel slats. He also has stated that the wall could be and that border patrol personnel want see-thru barrier structures, however, that doesn't comport with the nature of concrete.
The key obstacle in making any progress past the border-security funding impasse is Trump. As before the last shutdown, Trump has failed to precisely articulate what the hell he wants so lawmakers know what to fund (or refuse to fund). The short is that for Trump, the wall is more a rhetorical political lever having a lifespan that ends the instant he signs legislation to build a wall or some other sort of border barrier....and frankly, the notion of a wall has already ended by some 60% or so of the electorate.
Simply put: After the
FY 2019 border security fiasco, members of Congress on both sides of the aisle aren't keen to trust Trump, even after he's stated what he will agree to, which has a lot to do with why the legislative process apparently is "going nowhere."