Here are some number showing ONLY interior removals: https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/wp-content/uplo...
But yes border removals also jumped as well.. Maybe there is already a wall there? Here is a breakdown of deportations by three categories (border, interior and unknown) https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/wp-content/uplo...
Certainly much of this is due to better tracking (dimishing of the unknown category), tighter enforcement, and more efficiency, but none of those arguments dispute the trend of higher deportations under Obama simply because it doesn't fit the overall narrative of Obama as a "compassionate" president.
They are only paid to care about it or even be aware of it if it suits the needs of their designated group of oligarchs.
Coulter citation:
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deportations-20140...
"A young man said, “I think the concern is that because we’re a Hispanic community we’re not going to have the same help.” His parents had brought him to Michigan from Mexico, at the age of ten. More than a decade later, in 2012, he’d become a beneficiary of Obama’s program for undocumented immigrants who had come to the country as children; it protected him from deportation, if only temporarily. Now, he said, besides the hazardous water, he feared immigration raids. “They already have all my information,” he explained. “I don’t have any criminal record. . . . I don’t have any tickets, no drinking and driving.” But he was concerned about his children, who, after they saw Trump on TV talking about mass deportations, asked him, “What’s going to happen to us?”
Really, it protected him from deportation? How wonderful. I guess it didn't protect the other 2.5 million people who were deported which, by the way, is the largest number of deportations under any president. The other part of that paragraph is probably correct - things definitely aren't going to get any better under Trump, but you can blame that on the Democrats and their dishonest approach with governing. They'd rather invest in white-washing their legacy than make an honest attempt at fulfilling their "progressive" platform promises. And I suspect this is the reason behind much of this article as well.