TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

First speaker asks if the other person will sit down with Hakim Jeffries after the trip. Second speaker responds: I would. I'd be willing to. I would've now too. You know, I left. I said, come on over. Just put the government back. All they have to do is say yes and then it's over. Start. And then we go into a negotiation. Look, Obamacare has been terrible. We can make it better. I'm all for that. But they're not. And they they want to allow many, many illegal people that came into our country illegally from prisons, from mental institutions, from all over the world. They want them to get paid, and that's gonna hurt the citizens of our country, and I just can't do it.

The speaker contrasts the deportation policies of Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama with those of President Trump, highlighting the legal challenges faced by Trump. Clinton deported approximately 12.3 million people with zero injunctions or Supreme Court interference. Bush deported about 10.3 million, also facing no injunctions or Supreme Court intervention. Obama, nicknamed "deporter in chief," deported roughly 5.3 million, similarly without facing injunctions or Supreme Court obstacles. In contrast, Trump, with approximately 100,000 deportations, has faced at least 30 injunctions and Supreme Court involvement. The speaker criticizes the lack of legal challenges to Biden's immigration policies and suggests Trump should disregard Supreme Court rulings, similar to a statement made by Biden. The speaker supports Trump deporting all illegal aliens.

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.

The exchange centers on accusations of hyperbolic statements and the accuracy of quoted posts. Speaker 0 challenges Speaker 1's credibility, citing a series of posts and asking whether the statements were read correctly. - On 02/11/2026, Speaker 0 cites a Blueski post: “my words or your words, not mine. The democrats video telling service members to ignore illegal orders didn't go far enough. They should have also urged them to refuse unethical orders, whether illegal or not. There are many things deemed legal that are still obviously unethical, and everyone should hold themselves to this higher law,” and asks, “Did I read that correctly?” Speaker 1 confirms reading it and asks if Speaker 0 disagrees with it, questioning whether people should do unethical things in their capacity of [unknown context]. - On 12/31/2025, Speaker 0 references a post reading, “in front of god and country. … They referring to Republicans think they control their way into us accepting ethnic cleansing,” and asks, “Did I read that correctly?” Speaker 1 responds that it related to a DHS security post advocating a 100,000,000 deportations, stating that “A 100,000,000 deportations would be ethnic cleansing,” adding, “You would be True. One third of the country. So, yes, there are people within the Department of Homeland security.” Speaker 0 asks whether this is hyperbolic and requests more time. - On 02/05 (implied), Speaker 1 notes, “advocating a 100,000,000” but the sentence is cut off in the transcript. Speaker 0 comments, “reputations is … cleansing,” while continuing to engage in the discussion with the chair and audience; Speaker 0 asks for thirty more seconds. - On 03/02, Speaker 0 quotes Speaker 1: “if you rule against Trump's population purge agenda, no hyper permanently there, the nativists will name you, threaten you, and come after you. These judges are much braver than the ICE agents who hide behind masks while violating the constitution. They are much braver.” Speaker 1 clarifies, “They put their names on their rulings, and they stand behind their constitutional rulings. When I talk about population purge, I'm talking about the fact that they're trying to deport US born citizens, people born here. They are trying to deport them as well. So it's not a mass deportation agenda. It is also an agenda intended to reduce the population of The United States, including US born people.” - Speaker 0 responds, “Thank you.” Speaker 1 adds, “These are not hyperbolic statements. I appreciate you reading my account. Here's the good news.” The conversation escalates in tone as Speaker 0 interjects with disbelief, asking, “What planet … parachute him from?” Speaker 1 replies, “No. No.” Speaker 0 comments, “Hey, guys. You're you you You trigger my gag reflex,” and Speaker 1 closes with, “Mr. Bieber.”

Speaker 0 asks about the danger to US communities from 13,000 people convicted of murder who crossed the border illegally. Speaker 1 responds that the numbers being reported are a false representation of the data. Speaker 1 states that total returns and removals in the past year have been higher than every year under the previous administration since 2010. Speaker 1 insists that data should be reported accurately to avoid confusing or lying to the American people, and that the misrepresentation has been fact-checked and debunked by multiple outlets.

The speaker points to a chart showing a sharp decrease in illegal immigration during their time in office. They claim it was the lowest in history. They criticize the current president for a significant increase in illegal immigration, estimating around 20 million people. The speaker suggests looking at more recent data for a clearer picture.

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.

The session centers on evaluating past presidential performance and contemporary immigration politics. The speaker argues that the movement’s criticisms of immigrants and open borders would have appeared during Barack Obama’s presidency as well, pointing out that Obama is sometimes labeled “the deporter in chief.” When asked if Obama was a good president, the participants largely affirm that he did a good job: Governor Walts, Governor Pritzker, Governor Hochul, and Perryman all express the view that Obama’s presidency was good. The speaker then contends that Obama’s immigration policies were largely the same as the policies Republicans are currently opposing, noting that “Barack Obama had the very same policies for the most part on immigration that Republicans are parroting today.” The speaker contrasts this with charges that current protesters are labeling as Gestapo-like, arguing that those who advocate for open borders actually harm both Americans and those who are unauthorized immigrants, asserting that the policies do not arise from understanding or sympathy but have the opposite effect. A crucial part of the argument accuses those in power of exploiting racial identities for political ends. The speaker claims that “when you use brown people, just like they use black people with BLM and Marxists during BLM to usher that in,” money travels “back to the communist party,” and that elected officials’ platform is being used to usher in communism rather than defend American values. The speaker admonishes the audience not to roll their eyes, saying the topic is serious and that money is involved. The speaker emphasizes that the information being provided should inform decisions and asserts that if a person truly upholds American ideologies and constitutional perspectives, they should not be speaking at the rally. A formal action is announced: the speaker “authorized a letter to be sent to my office to the president of The United States to rescind millions of dollars in funding that we know are going to the no kings protest that were authorized and basically given under the last administration.” The claim is that Congress should act to protect the American people from foreign interests, foreign governments, and also the communist influence, rather than simply pointing fingers or blaming others. The statement ends with “Well, general lady yield,” signaling a procedural transition.

6 Democrats voted against a bill because Donald Trump preferred to campaign on the problem rather than solve it. The speaker believes the American people want solutions and a president focused on fixing issues, not playing political games. The bill in question would have allowed 1,800,000 illegal immigrants into the country annually, which many conservatives opposed.

The speaker states that an historic flood of undocumented immigrants crossed the border during the first three years of the administration, with arrivals quadrupling from the last year of President Trump. The speaker asks if it was a mistake to loosen immigration policies. The other speaker responds that the policies proposed are about fixing a problem, not promoting one. The first speaker reiterates that the numbers quadrupled. The other speaker claims that they have cut the flow of illegal immigration by half, as well as the flow of fentanyl by half, but that Congress needs to act to fix the problem.

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.

One estimate claims it would cost $88 billion to deport one million people a year. A speaker questions whether that is what American taxpayers should expect. Another speaker asks what price should be put on national security and whether it is worth the cost. A speaker asks if mass deportation can occur without separating families. Another speaker claims families can be deported together.

If you are waving a foreign flag in America while burning down a city, rioting, causing chaos, and screaming at law enforcement, get out of this country and go back to the country that you love. If you hate America and are running around waving a foreign flag while burning down police cars and looting, go back home. The speaker hopes President Donald Trump deports every single one of you. Barack Obama deported over 3,000,000 illegal immigrants, more than President Trump, but there was no outrage, riots, or protests. Biden deported some, but not enough, and there were no riots or protests. If you are an American citizen, you should be against illegal immigrants waving a foreign flag while burning down a city. Shame on you if you walk side by side with these illegal immigrants while they burn down the city and harass federal agents. Get them out of our country.

The fact that they didn't know the answers about Obama tells you everything you need to know. How many illegal immigrants did Barack Obama deport in his eight years as president? I don't know. Have a guess. No clue. Oh, I don't know. It's over 3,000,000. And he was known as deporter in chief by Mexicans. Yes. And that was more than Trump He deported way more than Trump. He deported way more pro rata than any president in history. Who dropped the most bombs in a calendar year in American history? Oh, heck. Come on. President Barack Obama. Right? Including drone programs and so on. What is still open today? Guantanamo Bay? Correct. I know that the general thing is Obama, angel, Trump, devil. Right. But if you actually apply the scrutiny that we give Trump put it this way, if Trump had deported 3,000,000 people, you think you guys wouldn't know that answer? Of course, you would.

The speaker asserts the southern border was secured under President Trump, upsetting some colleagues who claim it was done the wrong way. The speaker believes their colleagues are upset it was done at all, alleging President Biden reversed these measures, effectively inviting illegal immigration. The speaker estimates President Biden has allowed up to 20 million people into the country illegally, likening it to adding 10 Nebraskas. The speaker suggests that either President Biden and supporting Democrats believe in open borders, or they appointed incompetent individuals to manage the border. The speaker asks if vetting at the border is considered racist and if these foreign nationals are viewed as potential new voters. The speaker states that opposing illegal immigration while supporting legal immigration does not make someone racist, but rather someone who believes in the rule of law. The speaker concludes by reiterating the border was secured under the current administration, upsetting some colleagues.

Speaker 1: Mentions there are many things she wishes people knew, but mostly with the administration she wishes people knew that “we're letting in criminals daily.” Speaker 2: States the big issue for the region is migration, noting “we poured a lot of money into Central America,” amounting to “4,000,000,000 over four years,” but migrants are now coming from elsewhere, including Venezuela. Speaker 3: Asks, “So what is the end goal?” Speaker 1: Asks why aren’t they allowing children, noting “a lot of children travel to The United States, David.” Speaker 2: Explains aid goes to female presence in Mexico, training women, and mentions working with gender issues in Pakistan, aiming to recruit, retain, and advance more women in law enforcement. Asks whether US taxpayers’ money should be spent in “our country on this issue,” implying women may not care about certain aspects. Speaker 2: Asks how close Secretary Lincoln is to him, “five degrees separation,” and notes migration is a niche industry that flies under the radar; the average American doesn’t know what they do. Speaker 1: Thanks the chairman, ranking member, and members for the opportunity to testify. Speaker 2: Mentions upcoming briefings in two weeks on the FY 2025 budget request on the Hill. Speaker 0: States migration is the big issue for the Hill and asks, “Stop migration. What are we doing to stop migration?” Speaker 1: Responds that he’s not accountable for that and says, “We do stuff,” referencing the root causes strategy, which is about giving money to support and help people at the origins of migrants so they feel they can stay there instead of migrating. It’s “Central America, basically.” He says they poured a lot of money into Central America, and again mentions “4,000,000,000 over four years.” Speaker 2: Asks if it’s doing anything; response: yes, for them, but migrants are now coming from elsewhere like Venezuela, and acknowledges that outcome looks bad for the administration and for politics in general. Speaker 3: Seeks the end goal and asks again why there’s a limit on who’s allowed in. Speaker 1: Cites changes in demographics in the United States; notes that Nebraskans are traditional Americans not leftists, while Latin Americans are described as leftists, framing it as a system to try to change demographics.

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.

Speaker 0 opened by saying that over the last week he has interacted with over 300,000 plus real Chicagoans who say it is hate speech to evoke the Civil War or the Confederacy, to say that law enforcement is a sickness, while the other person has over 150 sworn CPD officers on his detail. He asked what the other person would say to those people and whether he would ask his 150 sworn officers to stand down if he and his wife Stacy are ever attacked, shot at, or rammed with a protester’s vehicle. Speaker 1 responded with sarcasm about the large number, joking that the interactions had “gone down to 300,000,” and claimed he had checked the other person’s comments. He asserted that the addiction on jails and incarceration and the addiction of militarism is evil, referencing Doctor King, and said it is incumbent to ensure that “the real Chicagoans” or the real people of America receive attention, suggesting we should spend billions of dollars overseas on the people in Chicago instead. Speaker 0 pushed back, saying that the real Chicagoans he talks to, mostly Black and Brown, feel that the other person does not distinguish between illegal aliens and real Chicago citizens, and that he is siding with illegal aliens over communities. He asserted that a recent incident involved “an illegal alien from Nicaragua” who grabbed a woman on the North Side, bashed her head into the sidewalk, knocked her unconscious, and raped her. He asked whether, if that had been the other person’s wife, Stacy, he would want ICE to deport that illegal alien, and asked for a yes or no answer. Speaker 1 pressed to get a direct answer, asking for a response “as a man, not as mayor,” and repeated the question about whether ICE should deport the rapist. Speaker 0 reiterated his question and stated that the answer for real Chicagoans is the deportation of the rapist, and that was the “answer for real Chicagoans.” Speaker 1 then apologized for being late, blaming traffic, and the other person quipped about the traffic, noting, “You’re not blaming me for the traffic, are you?” and said he had been watching.

Speaker 0 asks: “Can you talk about the number of missing children… Yeah. You guys have discovered in Memphis? That's amazing.” Speaker 1 responds: “Well, it's hundreds of thousands were lost through Biden and the Biden administration, and we are getting a lot of them back. But they're either dead, they're slaves, they're captured in some form. But think of it, hundreds of thousands we're talking about. Not even believable. And they came in through the border, they were sold, They were bargained for. And this was all Biden. Meaning Biden and Obama, the same, you know, the same mentality, frankly. I think it's the same mentality. Let me tell you, Barack Hussein Obama was a lousy president. A lot of bad things happened. Remember when they used to talk about Trump with the jail cells? Well, he built the jail cells for the children. He built those jail cells. Remember that came out? But sure, they were built in 2014. You remember when that came out after me going through that stuff for about two weeks, and then they found out it was Barack Obama that built those jail cells. No. These people are they were bad leaders. I hope I hope we don't have it again. I hope we don't have it again because, you know, our country has come back a long way, but it can only withstand so much, and we don't wanna ever go through that again. We never wanna have open borders again. We don't wanna have we don't wanna have men playing women's sports. We don't wanna have transgender for everybody. We don't want that. We wanna have a great country with low interest rates, nice housing, great education, a strong military. The basics. Yes, please.”

- Speaker 0 states that criminals will be deported and that entering the US illegally increases the likelihood of being caught and sent back. They describe these actions as lawful and representative of the approach taken by every Republican and Democratic president for the past fifty years. - Speaker 1 asserts the need for tough conditions: people should be told to come out of the shadows, and if they have committed a crime, they should be deported with no questions asked; they will be removed. - Speaker 2 addresses widespread concern among all Americans about the large numbers of illegal aliens entering the country. They claim the jobs held by these individuals might otherwise be occupied by citizens or legal immigrants, and that public services used by them impose burdens on taxpayers. The administration is described as having moved aggressively to secure the borders by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, and by borrowing welfare benefits to illegal aliens. In the upcoming budget, there will be efforts to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes, and to better identify illegal aliens in the workplace as recommended by the commission headed by former congresswoman Barbara Jordan. - Speaker 2 concludes by emphasizing that we are a nation of immigrants, but also a nation of laws. It is described as wrong and self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the abuse of immigration laws seen in recent years, and there is a stated commitment to doing more to stop it.

Speaker 0 states that voters in Pennsylvania and across the country consider immigration a key election issue, specifically the influx of illegal immigrants from over 150 countries. Speaker 0 asks how many illegal immigrants Speaker 1's administration has released into the country over the last three and a half years, suggesting a number like 1,000,000 or 3,000,000. Speaker 1 agrees immigration is a topic of discussion. Speaker 1 states that the U.S. has a broken immigration system that needs repair. Speaker 0 claims that 6,000,000 people have been released into the country.

Speaker 0 questions the practicality of a mass deportation program, particularly concerning families with American-citizen children, suggesting a single negative image could halt the entire program. Speaker 1 acknowledges that deporting a woman with children, resulting in media coverage, would complicate the effort. Speaker 0 then asks for confirmation of support for mass deportation, "even of women and children." Speaker 1 responds that they will look at it very closely, noting that the deportation of even one "wrong person" could be exploited by the "radical left lunatics."

An interviewer states that undocumented immigrant arrivals quadrupled during the first three years of the speaker's administration compared to the last year of President Trump's term and asks if loosening immigration policies was a mistake. The speaker responds that the problem is long-standing and that solutions have been offered since day one. The interviewer asks again if allowing the increase was a mistake. The speaker says the proposed policies are about fixing, not promoting, the problem. The interviewer reiterates that the numbers quadrupled. The speaker claims that due to their actions, they have cut the flow of illegal immigration and fentanyl by half, but congressional action is needed to fix the problem.

The discussion centers on a quote about deporting criminal illegal aliens, attributed to a political figure. The quote emphasizes being a nation of laws and holding accountable those who break them, especially dangerous individuals, noting that deportations of criminals had increased. Initial reactions link such policies to white American nationalism, racism, and xenophobia, with some finding the quote inconsistent with moral principles. The speaker then reveals the quote is from Barack Obama. This revelation surprises many, who expected it to be from Trump due to perceived differences in their approaches to immigration. Some suggest it highlights hypocrisy in politics. Despite Obama's higher deportation numbers at a comparable point in his presidency, some believe his policies were more humane than Trump's.