TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker questions the number of people deported out of the 2 million encounters and releases at the border. The secretary avoids answering the question and claims the immigration system is broken. The speaker presses for a specific number of non-criminal deportations, but the secretary doesn't provide an answer. The speaker also criticizes the lack of removals for those who received removal orders. The secretary denies this claim. The speaker accuses the secretary of implementing a policy that allows people to stay in the country without committing a crime, burdening social services. The secretary denies this and defends the safe and orderly pathways policy. The speaker argues that encounters at ports of entry have increased, suggesting corruption within the Mexican government. The secretary disagrees with the speaker's statements but fails to provide any numbers. The speaker concludes that the Mexican government and the secretary are influenced by cartels.

If you're a criminal, you'll be deported, and if you enter the U.S. illegally, your chances of getting caught just went up. According to Speaker 1, these actions are lawful and have been taken by both Republican and Democratic presidents for the past half century. Speaker 0 claims the media portrays Trump negatively for deporting illegal alien criminals, while Obama, Bill Clinton, and other Democrats were on board with this for years. Speaker 2 states their administration has moved aggressively to secure the borders by hiring a record number of new border guards, deporting twice as many criminal aliens, cracking down on illegal hiring, and barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens. Speaker 3 says using phrases like "undocumented workers" conveys that the government is not serious about combating illegal immigration. Speaker 1 says we cannot allow people to pour into The United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. Speaker 2 says they will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes and to better identify illegal aliens in the workplace. Speaker 0 claims Obama deported 5,300,000 people, and Bill Clinton deported 12,300,000, questioning why there is a sudden change of heart now.

Entering the U.S. legally and ignoring a judge's deportation order are crimes. Choosing to have a U.S. citizen child while in the country illegally puts the family in a difficult position. The speaker claims they removed children with mothers who requested it, calling it a parental decision. The speaker argues that if they hadn't removed the children with their mothers, they would be accused of separating families. They assert that when a parent wants their child to go with them, they facilitate it, and that the parents, not the government, made the decision. The speaker then references Lincoln Riley and Rachel Moran, stating they will never see their children again, and concludes that the administration is doing the right thing.

Speaker contends that current policy endangers public safety and that enforcement priorities are misaligned. The remarks center on immigration enforcement and its perceived consequences for communities. The speaker asserts: 'What ICE is doing is not making us safe.' They add: 'The Trump administration is treating immigrants generally, undocumented immigrants specifically as criminals.' They conclude with: 'But I remind people, being an undocumented immigrant is not a crime.' The statements underscore a distinction between immigration status and criminality, and frame immigration policy as a safety issue rather than a question of criminality. Overall, the message challenges conflating undocumented status with criminal intent and calls for a reevaluation of enforcement approaches.

What's your name? Where are you from? I was born in Thailand. Have you ever been deported from the U.S.? No, I've never been deported. What have you been charged with? I'm not a citizen; my mother is. I've seen Dr. Phil on TV. This is an example of sanctuary cities, where illegal immigrants, like those involved in sex crimes against children, are walking the streets instead of being detained by federal agents. You've been charged with sex crimes? Not really. So, you've never been deported? Nope. We need to process and lock them up.

The speaker claims the incoming administration wants to rectify abuses by enforcing immigration law, stating that those who entered illegally should leave. They allege the administration is stopping deportations. The speaker asserts that, according to the courts, it is lawful to be unlawful if you're Joe Biden, but unlawful to be lawful if you're Donald Trump.

Speaker 1 confirmed signing a memo but denied being the author of the family separation policy. Speaker 1 stated they gave Secretary Nielsen numerous recommendations on how to secure the border and save lives. Speaker 2 claimed that Speaker 1 recommended family separation as option three. Speaker 1 stated they recommended zero tolerance, the same as when any US citizen parent gets arrested with a child. Speaker 2 stated that legal asylees are not charged with any crime. Speaker 1 stated that being in the country illegally is a violation and that if one wants to seek asylum, they should do it the legal way at the port of entry. Speaker 1 referred to a congresswoman as the dumbest ever to listen to congress.

You treating migrants humanely? No, reports show they’re on planes without water. That’s nonsense. Our detention facilities exceed all standards. Check the ICE website for our performance-based standards; they’re the highest in the industry. But are you only detaining illegal criminals? There are reports of students showing bruises from deportation flights. That’s absurd. We investigate any claims. The ICE professionals I led uphold the highest standards. We care for detainees while enforcing the law without apology. Are you using military planes for deportations as a tactic? No, we’re securing the border, which is a national security risk. Illegal entry is a crime. The current crisis overwhelms border security, leading to increased drug trafficking and terrorism. President Trump will secure the border and enforce immigration laws without hesitation. Expect our efforts to intensify soon.

Speaker 0 argues that the premise is disgusting and cites CBS admitting that sixty percent of those arrested had criminal charges or convictions, while noting the majority were non-violent. They question what “non-violent” includes, listing drug trafficking, child porn, fraud, DUI, and human smuggling, and mock the idea of those as harmless offenses. They accuse CBS of trying to influence public perception and claim, “What are you trying to do here? It’s like you want more people to die.” They proceed to highlight CBS’s claim that forty percent of ICE arrestees had no criminal past, arguing the distinction should be about status in The US. They counter with examples: an MS-13 member who shot, tortured, and murdered five people but “forget it, in El Salvador,” suggesting he’s nonviolent because he wasn’t convicted in the US. They compare this to other cases where alleged criminals killed in the US had no prior US criminal history, and to scammers running fake day cares who haven’t been prosecuted yet. The speaker contends that crimes committed outside The US do not count, and posits that we should owe Nicolas Maduro an apology. They note that this is coming from “the same media that lectures one death is too many, which is used to justify insane regulations in public health policies,” referencing the pandemic and the claim that “a single death is a tragedy,” contrasted with a later statement about a jogger being killed during lunch. They frame the report as an effort to stop deporting bad people by portraying the target as peaceful illegals and by saying they lied when they claimed to do “the worst first.” They argue that resisting the goal of deporting the worst first forced ICE to use a wider net that included all illegals. They claim that if Waltz or Fry had cooperated, the issue would never have arisen, and state that their goal was to prevent deporting criminals so ICE would be forced to sift through all illegals, which would be a political win for those who would say, “They’re not going after the worst after all.” The speaker concludes it’s moronic, not to protect people but to protect political power, and that this allows the narrative to say a murderous felon came here looking for a better life, when in fact, it was a better knife.

Speaker 0 argues that the federal government has made clear that the statutory term for certain non-citizens is "illegal aliens," and that this choice is intended to water down the issue compared to the label "undocumented." They illustrate this by comparing undocumented to someone who forgets a wallet but still has a right to drive; the analogy suggests that even with a missing document, some rights remain, whereas crossing into the country illegally is presented as a deliberate act. The speaker contends that the matter is not simply about missing a document, but about knowingly violating the law. They assert that entering the country illegally is an intentional act, not a mere mistake. The speaker emphasizes that this is done knowingly and, in many cases, with the help of the cartels. The claim is that the act is not accidental but a deliberate violation of law supported by criminal organizations. The overall message stresses the distinction between a temporary lapse in documentation and a conscious decision to violate immigration laws, portraying the latter as a calculated act facilitated by external criminal networks.

The speaker was asked if they still believe the border should be decriminalized. The speaker responded that there should be consequences for those who cross the border illegally, and laws must be followed and enforced. The speaker claims to be the only person in the race who has prosecuted transnational criminal organizations trafficking guns, drugs, and human beings. They also claim to be the only person in the race who served a border state as attorney general to enforce laws. They would enforce laws as president.

Democrats and the media have portrayed deported individuals as innocent, such as a supposed father of three who was actually an MS-13 gang member. An immigration judge determined in 2019 that this person had no right to be in the U.S., also noting traffic violations and missed court dates. The speaker asserts that the individual was an illegal alien who broke laws to enter the country, and that even left-wing media didn't criticize the deportation itself, only the reasoning behind it. The speaker states that the administration does not seek permission from Democrats to deport illegal immigrants. The speaker questions why Democrats are supposedly angrier about deporting violent gang members than they are about the victims of those gang members, suggesting they have lost touch with reality.

Ninety percent of people coming into the country are trying to do the right thing. Currently, some people who shouldn't be are being removed from the country, including those with visas. The goal is to keep out people who are doing bad things. Immigrants are reportedly much less likely to commit crimes than American-born citizens.

Being undocumented is not a crime. We need to change the narrative and stop labeling undocumented immigrants as criminals. Let's treat them with respect and not as lawbreakers when they cross the border.

Speaker says Mexico is conducting mass deportations of people who stayed illegally to 'manage a country,' insisting this is not about hating people but enforcing laws. They note signs saying 'no human is illegal,' but insist 'once you enter the wrong way, you're breaking the law.' They compare Mexico to the US, claiming Mexico 'start beating you up and then they question you later,' and 'In Mexico, they are doing mass deportations and are using force. Nothing like you see here in The US.' They state, 'Crossing the border illegally, that's a crime,' while adding, 'you don't see it that way, but I do.' They add a Japan analogy: 'Go to Japan and try to do it illegally and guarantee you, you're gonna You don't live in Japan. That's not a crime. You're not breaking the law. I mean, you are breaking the law, but it's not a criminal act.'

The speaker discusses the terminology used by the federal government regarding immigrants. They state that the statutory term is not “undying” but “illegal aliens,” and that this is the term used by the government. The speaker suggests that using a different term is an attempt to water down the description of the issue, comparing the shift to a notion of “undocumented” people. To illustrate, the speaker uses an analogy: if someone forgets their wallet and thus does not have their driver’s license, they still have a right to drive, implying that a missing document should not redefine whether someone is entitled to drive. The point being made is that choosing terminology is not simply about a minor omission but about a broader characterization of the status of those who come into the country. The speaker asserts that entering the country “intentionally” and “to come in illegally” is not merely a matter of a missing document. They emphasize that, in their view, this involves a deliberate act of violation of the law. It is described as not just a simple mistake but a purposeful action. The speaker stresses that the act is often done “with the help of the cartels in many cases,” highlighting an element they consider significant in understanding the phenomenon. In summary, the speaker argues that the official language frames immigrants as “illegal aliens” rather than using terms like “undocumented,” contending that the latter would downplay the act of illegal entry. They contend that illegal entry is an intentional breach of the law, not just an incidental lack of paperwork, and that, in many instances, it involves coordination with cartels.

There are people pretending to request asylum in our country, but instead they are smoking weed and doing drugs without any regard for our laws. This is happening because the Democrats invited them in and our cities are being overrun. We have taken God and the rule of law out of our country, resulting in crime, drugs, an invasion on our southern border, and the destruction of America. This is all by design from the left who hate our country. It's up to American citizens to take action and stop it.

This transcript centers on immigration, law, and due process. "This is America, man. Gotta do things the right way. That's it." "Gotta do it the right way. You wanna come here, come here legally." "I don't support illegal immigration, period. It's all there is to it." "You follow the law, man. Follow the law." He says, "due process is important... but when you come down to the immigration, it's impossible." "Not for illegals that are coming in illegal, man. That's what they did. They broke the law." They debate: "You can play that word undocumented. Illegal is illegal." They discuss Trump: "Absolutely. 100%." and "Witch hunt. Why?" "Going after criminals." Economy: "The economy's in shambles." versus "Our economy is great." "We don't base things in this country laws in the constitution on public opinion." "End of conversation. Do it legally."

If you're a criminal, you'll be deported, and if you enter the U.S. illegally, your chances of getting caught just went up. According to Speaker 1, these actions are lawful and have been taken by both Republican and Democratic presidents for the past half century. Speaker 0 claims the media portrays Trump negatively for deporting illegal alien criminals, while Obama, Bill Clinton, and other Democrats were previously on board with this. Speaker 2 states their administration has moved aggressively to secure the borders by hiring more border guards, deporting twice as many criminal aliens, cracking down on illegal hiring, and barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens. Speaker 3 says using phrases like "undocumented workers" conveys that the government isn't serious about combating illegal immigration. Speaker 1 says we cannot allow people to pour into The United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. Speaker 2 says they will try to speed the deportation of illegal aliens arrested for crimes and better identify illegal aliens in the workplace. Speaker 0 claims Obama deported 5,300,000 people, and Bill Clinton deported 12,300,000, questioning why there is a sudden change of heart now.

Here's the thing: Some estimate it would cost $88 billion to deport a million people a year. But what price do you put on national security? Is there a way to carry out mass deportation without separating families? Of course there is, families can be deported together. I have given the secretary numerous options to secure the border and save lives. I recommended a zero tolerance policy, the same as when any U.S. citizen parent gets arrested when they're with a child. If I get arrested for a DUI with a child in the car, I'll be separated. When you're in the country illegally, it's a violation. If you want to seek asylum, go through the port of entry, do it the legal way. The Attorney General has made that clear.

If someone crosses the border illegally, I believe it should not be a criminal offense with jail time. It should be treated as a civil enforcement issue instead.

Speaker 0 states that entering the country illegally is not a criminal violation. Speaker 1 strongly disagrees, calling the statement "one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard" and asserting that it lacked any rational thought. Speaker 1 concludes that everyone who heard the statement is now dumber.

Once a deportation order is issued, due process is over, having occurred prior to the judge's decision, often with NGO assistance. Over a million people are being appropriately deported. No lawyer is offered at that point. The left defends criminals over American safety and the rule of law, even defending a congresswoman who punched a police officer. This defense of criminals and attacks on law enforcement caused them to lose swing states. The Biden administration refuses to detain criminals. The left doesn't know a good guy from a bad guy, coddling violent criminals and wanting to defund ICE. Cutting a deal with Iran and destabilizing the Middle East led to the invasion of Israel. The American people rejected them because they don't know a good person from a bad one. Criminals and cartels have stopped making billions trafficking humans. Border patrol and law enforcement support these statements. Judges execute removal orders after due process.

Why don’t we just clean up the border? Biden has the power to do that, but the asylum backlog is overwhelming due to increased immigration. Many cases don’t lead to deportation because they’re often approved for asylum. The current administration is influenced by special interests, which complicates immigration policy. There’s a significant number of people applying for asylum at the border, and many enter the U.S. on visitor visas before seeking asylum, exploiting a loophole. While some argue deportation is necessary, it doesn’t align with the Democratic Party platform, which is shaped by those who fund the party. This influence affects how immigration issues are addressed.

It's common sense that we have many migrants here illegally who have committed crimes. It's hard to understand why anyone would defend allowing them to stay in the country. If someone is here illegally and engages in criminal activity, they should be removed. This issue was significant in the recent election. In the Senate, with 47 members, if we can't secure at least 7 votes on this matter, it reflects why we lost. This is one of the reasons for our defeat. Brett, consider that perspective; it's a crucial point being made.