TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

A state of emergency is now in effect at the border. However, the situation feels unchanged from earlier today. One notable change is the discontinuation of the CBP One app, which was introduced by the Biden administration to create a more humane and orderly process at the border. This decision comes from the Trump administration. Reporting from this location has occurred over four presidential administrations, including the Obama administration.

The Biden-Harris administration is allegedly importing 30,000 aliens monthly on commercial flights into U.S. cities via the CHNV program, following the repeal of Trump-era immigration policies that led to increased illegal immigration. This program allows aliens to fly to their chosen destination and stay in the U.S. indefinitely, without a comprehensive tracking system. The administration claimed the program would decrease illegal entries, but at least 520,000 aliens have entered through it already. The program could allow 3,600,000 people to travel to the U.S. visa-free over 10 years and reside here permanently. America First Legal and a coalition of states are challenging the program in court to shut it down and restore integrity to the immigration system.

Speaker 0 asked how many Afghans have been admitted to the United States through parole since the fall of Kabul, and whether the administration will review each individual’s status on a case-by-case basis as the two-year parole period expires. Speaker 1 replied that he would be pleased to provide the data but does not have it at the moment. Speaker 0 asserted that 70,192 Afghans were brought to the United States and placed on parole for two years, and again pressed the question of whether each individual’s status would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis as parole periods come to an end. Speaker 1 described the program as Operation Allies Welcome, a government initiative designed to provide refuge for many individuals. He stated that they were screened and vetted by government personnel and that they were brought in on categorical parole. When parole periods are subject to renewal, he said, they will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Speaker 0 then referenced Fort McCoy in his state, noting that two years earlier the commander there said individuals were not interviewed on a case-by-case basis. He argued that Afghanistan, a region described as a terror hotbed, should have used the Special Immigrant Visa process, but the previous administration did not route those who came in from Afghanistan through the SIV. He asked about the damage caused at Fort McCoy during the period when more than 12,000 Afghans arrived. Speaker 1 responded by reiterating that the individuals who benefited from Operation Allies Welcome were indeed screened and vetted by government personnel and were brought in on categorical parole, not through the Special Immigrant Visa process. He then stated that Fort McCoy sustained $145,600,000 in damage and that the place was virtually destroyed. He concluded the exchange with a brief transition, signaling a move to another topic.

ActBlue changed its donation process in September to require CVV numbers to prevent foreign donations. However, there hasn't been a noticeable drop-off in donations since this change. The information provided by ActBlue was misleading; they only require CVV numbers for new accounts opened after the change. This means that hundreds of thousands of existing donors are still not subject to this requirement, which was not clearly communicated.

Will you work with President Trump to reinstate the Remain in Mexico program to ensure that only legitimate asylum claims are processed while individuals wait in Mexico? Yes, I will partner with him to reinstate this policy. Regarding the CBP 1 app, which allows asylum seekers to apply without providing evidence, will you end its use? Yes, if confirmed, I will shut down the CBP 1 app and preserve necessary data. The CHNV program has allowed mass parole without proper evaluation. Will you stop this abuse? Yes, we will return to case-by-case evaluations for parole and ensure our legal immigration system is fully utilized, with more judges and courts to process cases properly, unlike the current administration's approach.

A state of emergency is now in effect at the border. However, the situation feels unchanged from earlier today. The only notable change is the discontinuation of the CBP One app, which was implemented by the Biden administration to create a more fair and humane process at the border. This decision was made by the Trump administration. Reporting from this location has occurred over four presidential administrations, including during the Obama administration.

We propose a single, simple transaction for travelers, airlines, and government authorities. Countries should publish their screening entry requirements in a standard format on a common framework. We will create a global registry of trusted sites for COVID-19 testing and vaccination. These sites will collect identifying information to verify the person's identity at the border. Results should be available using internationally recognized data standards and integrated into reservation check-in processes. Vaccination records can be stored in national registries or personal health records. This framework will enable an engine to determine if someone meets the entry requirements for a country. Trust is important for both travelers and governments, and our Common Pass platform prioritizes privacy. We invite collaboration on this project.

The video documents an undercover-style investigation at the New York City Board of Elections on the 10th Floor at 200 Varick Street, focusing on whether noncitizens can register to vote. Speaker 0 plans to pose as a noncitizen Canadian green-card holder and attempts to engage a staffer about voter registration. In the first encounter, Speaker 2 tells Speaker 1 that “Everything you fill out, you’re swearing an affidavit that everything you’re putting down is true,” and notes that “you gotta be a citizen to fill it out.” Speaker 1 identifies as “a green card holder from Canada.” The staffer initially signals uncertainty about whether to fill out the form, saying, “I wouldn’t fill it out,” but also suggests the possibility that noncitizens have previously registered. Speaker 0 observes that the staffer does not state it would be illegal to complete the application as a noncitizen, only that the staffer “doesn’t recommend it.” The conversation reveals that the staffer acknowledges noncitizens have registered before: “We have people who come in here and they have legal situations and they registered, they weren’t a citizen, boom boom boom.” The staffer also admits that they “can’t stop you from submitting the application,” and that there is generally no full background check; “we can’t do our background check on you. We just collect it. That’s it.” Speaker 2 reinforces that the staff’s role is to collect and submit, not to verify citizenship, stating, “we accept anything that comes over the counter,” and reiterating that “if it comes back to you, it comes back to… If it doesn’t, it doesn’t.” When Speaker 1 asks if they will report the noncitizen, the staffer responds, “No. No. No. I’m not… that’s not my job to report anyone. My job is just to collect the application and put it and submit it to the department.” Speaker 0 cites New York election law—“Under New York election law, section seventeen one zero six, any election officer who willfully violates any provision of the election law relative to the registration of electors is guilty of a felony”—to argue that processing a noncitizen registration would be a criminal offense. After leaving the office, the pair return to request more information, but the staffer becomes suspicious, consults a coworker, and then refuses to accept their application. The video notes that, according to the staff, “we get registrations come to the mail. We, you know, we whatever comes through, we accept and then it’s submitted,” and emphasizes the absence of ID or proof of citizenship requirements at registration, solely requiring an affidavit asserting citizenship. The segment concludes by highlighting concerns about potential threats to electoral integrity, asserting that there is no requirement to show ID or documentation to register, and that all that is required is signing an affidavit claiming American citizenship.

We are committed to ensuring that only U.S. citizens participate in elections, and so far, there is no evidence of noncitizen voting. However, there have been instances where noncitizens voted; this year, 135 were identified as having voted, with another 400 registered but not yet voting. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean we shouldn't have measures in place to prevent it, similar to how we maintain TSA for air travel security.

The transcript states that the Trump administration could revoke existing visas or deny them to applicants if they celebrated or made light of Charlie Kirk's assassination on social media. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau posted an annex directing consular officials to, "undertake appropriate action." It explains that, under President Trump, the State Department has ramped up expanded screening and vetting of many visa applicants' social media accounts, and that the department has utilized AI technology in the effort.

Was the withdrawal from Afghanistan successful? The evacuation led by the Department of Defense and State was historic in scale. However, when asked how many evacuees were vetted before boarding flights to the U.S., the response was unclear. It was stated that 100% of individuals arriving in the U.S. had been screened, but specific numbers for those boarding planes in Afghanistan were not provided. The claim was made that over 99% were fully vetted before boarding, but the speaker could not confirm details about the vetting process at Kabul Airport. Ultimately, there was a lack of clarity on the exact vetting numbers prior to boarding.

Illegals at the Miami airport can use the CBP one app as a valid ID to board planes in the US. The app allows migrants to claim asylum and enter the country, even if they have committed crimes. The app does not require photos and does not store biographical information. This raises concerns as illegal immigrants from countries on terror watch lists can use this process, while American citizens are required to have a real ID by 2025 to board flights. This discrepancy is difficult to justify.

The CBP One app, used by migrants claiming asylum, is now accepted at TSA checkpoints in the Miami airport's Delta terminal as valid ID for boarding planes. The CBP One app was intended to validate non-US citizen travel documentation when a traveler lacks acceptable ID. According to the speaker, migrants can enter any information into the app, even those wanted for crimes. Photos are optional, and biographical information is not stored. The speaker questions how people from terror watch list countries can use this process. The speaker contrasts this with the Real ID requirement for Americans by May 2025 to board flights. They question how illegal immigrants can board planes with unverifiable information while Americans face stricter ID requirements.

The discussion centers on the Afghanistan withdrawal and the vetting of evacuees who boarded planes. The opening exchange frames the withdrawal as a historic evacuation led by the Department of Defense and the Department of State. The senator asks specifically how many of the evacuees were vetted before they got on the plane. The official responds by stating it is the policy to vet and screen evacuees for the United States. When the senator presses for a numerical figure, the official first indicates uncertainty about Afghanistan-specific cases but reiterates the policy. The senator clarifies the question: for those who got on the C-17s and other planes, how many were vetted before they boarded, by American officials? The official replies that for those brought to the United States, it is their policy to vet and screen 100% of them. The senator pushes for a precise, testable number, asking if the answer is a sworn 100%. The official reiterates the policy and adds that all of the individuals who arrived in the United States have been screened. The senator presses further, asking for the exact percentage, and the official begins to provide a quantified estimate: well over 99% of them were fully screened and vetted before they boarded a flight. The senator seeks sources for that information, but the official continues, noting that if any were not screened before boarding, they would have been screened and vetted while in flight, and if any derogatory information was found, they would be placed in immigration enforcement proceedings and removal. The senator then asks directly, under oath, whether the 99% figure refers to all people who got on the planes in Afghanistan. The official clarifies that precision is important and notes that the question being asked concerns planes from transit countries, the third country scenario, rather than the specific Afghan departures being discussed at that moment. The senator emphasizes the focus on people who got on the planes and left the chaotic airport, asking again for the percentage vetted before they got on those planes. The official ultimately asserts that he cannot speak to those planes from transit countries, but reiterates that the discussion about those who arrived in the United States involves screening and vetting, and that those arrivals have been screened. The exchange ends with the senator acknowledging the limitation, and the official indicating that he cannot provide a detailed accounting for the transpiring circumstances of planes from transit countries, while maintaining that those who arrived in the United States were screened.

Speaker 0 discusses registering and voting from outside the country, citing Pakistan as an example. He mentions evidence of two or three other people out of the country who voted, as well as people residing outside the district. He describes the online voter registration system as an honor system, saying anybody can enter information to register to vote. He states, “All you have to do is click a box and say that you're not lying,” after which you’ll receive an email from the secretary of state or something in the mail saying, “thank you for registering to vote,” and there you are. Once you're on the voter rolls, anytime an election comes around, “guess what? You get mailed a ballot. Right? You get mailed something to vote.” He concludes by noting, “So we found that a little bit problema.”

The speaker downloaded the CBP One app after the vice presidential debate to test its ease of use. The app asks users to identify as either a smuggler. It requires basic information like name, and a selfie; passport or ID are optional. The speaker chose California as their destination state, using a random ZIP code. The app allows users to select from eight different bridges to meet under; the speaker chose the Eagle Pass Bridge. The speaker, a white man from Michigan, used a picture of Carlos Mencia to demonstrate how easy it is to register. He claims that someone wanting to enter the country and obtain temporary asylum could easily use their own picture. The speaker states that he indicated having no documentation, ID, passport, or license, and that there's no way to cross-check the submitted information beyond the selfie.

The exchange centers on who is responsible for approving an asylum claim linked to an Afghan individual who was part of the Afghanistan evacuation and who was involved in a deadly incident in Washington, D.C. The dialogue is combative and procedural as members press for accountability and a straight answer. - Speaker 0 references a National Guardsman’s death in an incident involving the same individual, calling it an unfortunate accident, while Speaker 1 insists it was a terrorist act and asserts the guard member was shot in the head. The interaction escalates as Speaker 0 seeks clarification about who approved the asylum application for this person. - Speaker 0 asks plainly: “Who approved the asylum claim?” Speaker 1 responds that the asylum application was thoroughly filled out by information gathered by the Biden administration and that the asylum process was put into place under rules established by the Biden administration. Speaker 0 counters that, by implication, the Trump administration had changed the vetting process and the asylum had moved forward under those changes, prompting a dispute over attribution of responsibility. - Speaker 1 emphasizes that the evacuation of Afghanistan under Operation Allies Welcome was “thoroughly vetted by the Biden administration at that point in time” and insists that the individual’s asylum process followed the vetting and rules established by the Biden administration. Speaker 0 pushes back, pressing for a yes-or-no determination of who approved the asylum. - Speaker 2 offers a different framing, stating that the individual was vetted to serve as a soldier in Afghanistan and that this vetting standard was used by the Biden administration “as a ruse to bring him here.” He asserts that had standard operating procedures for special immigrant visas been followed, “none of the Allies Welcome people would have come to America,” attributing responsibility to President Biden. He also invokes a point of order and references a murder “that took place in DC,” insisting the prior description as “unfortunate” was inappropriate. - The dialogue includes interruptions and procedural motions: Speaker 2 asserts the comment about a murder was not a valid point of order; a separate speaker notes that the incident being discussed was not merely an “unfortunate incident” but a murder. - Throughout, the participants accuse each other of misattributing the asylum approval to the wrong administration and of altering vetting processes, with repeated demands for a straightforward answer about who approved the asylum application and persistent insistence that the Biden administration’s vetting and rules were the basis for the asylum decision. The exchange ends with procedural interjections and the continuation of the dispute over responsibility for the asylum approval and the accompanying tragic incident.

The Biden administration is allowing migrants to bypass ID checks at airports, raising security concerns. A recent DHS report reveals that illegal migrants can use the CBP One app instead of traditional identification, even choosing whether to allow officers to take their photo. This practice may inadvertently increase national security risks, according to the inspector general. A DHS spokesperson disputed the report, claiming it lacks context. However, the national security director for air marshals emphasized that unvetted individuals on flights pose a threat, as they can repeatedly fly without proper identification, often on taxpayer-funded flights.

The speaker thanks the madam speaker and asks their colleague about air travel. They mention a budget announcement of $105 million over 5 years for the known traveler digital identity pilot project. They refer to a World Economic Forum document that discusses attestations of citizenship, educational degrees, and vaccination for viral disease. The speaker wants their colleague to explain the government's investment in this project.

We will implement a biometric entry exit visa tracking system on land, sea, and air to ensure proper tracking.

Chair recognizes the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. Has there been a parole program of this magnitude recently? There have been many parole uses historically, some large and some small. This is not unique; the parole authority has existed for decades. The CHNV process is part of a broader border management strategy that includes enforcement and lawful immigration pathways. Why this specific program for four countries? There was a need for meaningful lawful pathways for certain populations. Can someone paroled under this program sponsor another? Yes, 86% of participants are U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, but a migrant can also sponsor someone else. This approach is part of a comprehensive strategy for enduring border management, which requires collaboration between various immigration systems.

Speaker 0 raises a concern about a security risk and asks what reassurances can be given about screening and efforts to prevent such individuals from entering. The speaker then asserts that no one is coming into the United States who has not been through a thorough screening and background check process. They note that there are many individuals who have not been through that process and have gone to lily pad countries as that process has been completed. The statement adds that this does not mean there is a flag attached to those cases; it means they have not completed their...

The speaker questions the implementation of a phone app called CBP 1 that allows noncitizens without appropriate documents to schedule appointments and be admitted at certain border points. The speaker criticizes the lack of asylum requirements and interviews for those using the app, claiming that individuals are simply released into the country. The speaker also raises concerns about the cost and development of the app. The discussion then shifts to the increase in Chinese nationals crossing the border, with the speaker questioning if any of them are members of the Chinese Communist Party. The secretary of Homeland Security denies the claims and states that individuals who pose a security threat are detained. However, the secretary is unable to provide specific information about the incident involving busloads of Chinese nationals.

The speaker references CHNV parole programs from the previous administration and says organizations here sponsored many individuals from certain countries, sometimes without knowing who they were sponsoring: 'They did not know necessarily the individuals they were sponsoring.' He states, 'They were doing almost a blanket sponsorship.' 'That is fraud.' 'That's something that should have been caught.' He says, 'I know the previous administration was aware of how the sponsorships were happening, and, no action was taken.' 'I'm glad to see that we're taking action.' The speaker indicates there was knowledge of the sponsorships and lack of action, and asserts that action is underway.

Florida has many illegal immigrants working in agriculture, construction, and hospitality. As we consider significant roundups of these individuals, is there a plan to support these industries and prevent financial hardship? In response, similar concerns were raised during the implementation of the E-Verify system in 2023. Now, any industry hiring new employees must verify their immigration status. This process is crucial to ensure compliance with the law and address workforce needs.