Donald Trump has been mangling the English language ever since he entered public life. All of his tweets seem to end in an exclamation mark – although no-one knows why. The grammar in a lot of them is incredibly bad. His latest gem was in a tweet he wrote only yesterday, justifying his plan to deport illegal immigrants immediately and without a trial: "We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately bring them back from where they came." If anyone understands this person, please let me know....

Perhaps Melania was taught by the same English teacher that taught her husband...?

нас в Англии учили, что оба варианта приемлемы

It all depends on where you are and where the other person has moved to.

If s.o.'s moved close to you from somewhere further away, it's:
'to send them back to where they came from'

If s.o.'s moved from (close to you/amongst you) to somewhere further away, it's:
'to bring them back from where they've gone to'

You can't mix the two constructions, as that would be illogical in English.

In the Trump example it's not just inelegant to say "bring them back", it's wrong. He can't "bring" them back to (say) Mexico unless he first goes (or his officials first go) to Mexico. It's 'send'!

Oh no, he can't! If you don't believe me, see this Merriam-Webster definition of 'to bring back':

"to convey, lead, carry, or cause to come along with one toward the place from which the action is being regarded" [my underlining].

The important bit is the bit I've underlined, which is what I meant by "It all depends on where you are".

** if you take something and bring (carry) it back to the point from where it came (originated), you do not necessarily need to be at the said point yourself in advance of the bringing. **

You'd have to either be at the said place in advance of it arriving, or you'd have to accompany it there. In both cases the action would have to be "regarded" (to quote M-W) from the place that the "something" was in originally; otherwise you'd have to use other verbs such as 'to send' or 'to take it back to the point from where it came', not 'to bring'.

Remember that we're not talking about all of the many different uses of 'to bring' as used in umpteen different scenarios, nor about set expressions such as 'to bring s.o. to their senses', 'it brings back happy memories', 'to bring back capital punishment' etc; we're talking about the specific scenario of Trump saying that migrants have come to the US from other countries, and he wants them to be forced to go back.

If Trump meant that he/his officials would accompany the migrants back to the countries they've come from and he was speaking as though he/his officials were in those countries when the migrants returned (see the M-W reference to 'regarded' again), it might make sense, but he clearly isn't saying this; he's speaking as someone in the US and he simply wants the migrants to go back to whichever country they came from. In that scenario, you can't say 'bring them back'; it's 'send them back', 'return them', 'take them back' (if they're to be accompanied), or any of several other verbs. But not 'bring'.

the 'message' in the presidential squawk is 'we will take them by the hand and march them right back to the US border', that is to say deport forcefully and/or under supervision, - exactly that 'to accompany', 'to see them out' &. And this is what the tweet aims to convey, and as far as I understand, succeeds in doing. What he probably wanted to write is 'kick them back' but then tempered it somewhat.

The English classes you went to weren't also attended by a noisy, overweight boy with weird orange hair by any chance, were they? Just wondered..... )))

Pssst... I never had an English class in my whole life!
(and it shows oftener than one should like))

ref. subject: odd space between "be" and "best"
it' just another trumpologism: Bebest or bebest (like "covfefe").