I think he sees the 40% success as worth the trade-off. Thus he can't lend any support or sympathy for the conservative issue over the cost of supporting the other 60% or the bad guys that hide within the overall swarm.

Not at all. It's not a question of it being "worth the trade-off." It's that the 40% success rate means that an even larger percentage of the overall population has a valid claim that's not "gaming the system," especially given their lack of resources.

I have enormous sympathy for the cost of supporting all of the claimants during their wait for their hearing, and am 100% in support of taking steps to reduce that wait time as much as possible so that pending asylees don't get a few years waiting in the U.S. before their hearing. What I push back on is characterizing the overall population of asylees as "gaming the system," when in fact they're predominantly people who are presenting legitimate arguments and are (and should be) entitled to have those heard.