The show is about on a professor interviewing a prisoner about his actions with respect to Trump's immigration policies. Throughout the show the professor argues constantly with the prisoner, which I didn't find effective. But in the final scene the prisoner (after complaining about broken promises by politicians) says something to the effect of "Trump promised to build a wall and he did. The purpose of a wall is to keep people out, but after what we did, who would want to come here?"
I love that point, but it was disingenuous coming from a man whose character doesn't develop until the final scenes. I thought it would have been more powerful if the professor interviewing the prisoner kept her calm. Then instead of the prisoner complaining about politicians lying and breaking promises but praising trump for breaking promises (which I found incredible inconsistent), the prisoner should have complained about Trump not actually building a wall. In response, the calm and collected professor responds "But he did ....blah blah blah." That would have been much more effective in my opinion.
Also, in the show we learn that there was a holocaust. The author obviously found his inspiration from Treblinka because the similarities are striking. I thought this was detrimental to the the point of the story because it doesn't take a holocaust before we sacrifice our democratic liberal principles. It is already happening, and that is a huge shame. I know the author doesn't intend to suggest this, but it was the impression I got.