reSee.it - Related Video Feed

A person stated they paid a cartel around $10,000. They believe the American people are right to be concerned about who is entering the country, because there's no guarantee that everyone is "good." They ask what if they are killers or psychopaths. They claim there is no security bill, security check, or background check. They express worry about who is crossing the border, stating that some people do not look normal.

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.

In the past 3 years, there has been a significant increase in illegal border crossings and a backlog of asylum cases. The speaker questions why the secretary deserves to keep his job, considering these issues. The secretary responds by acknowledging the problems and emphasizing the need for legislation to address the broken immigration system.

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.

- Speaker 0 asserts that there will never be a country like the current one and questions whether Republicans should frame it that way. - Speaker 1 asks if the H-1B visa issue will not be a big priority for the administration, arguing that to raise wages for American workers you can’t flood the country with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of foreign workers. - Speaker 0 counters that there is a need to bring in talent, and questions whether there are enough talented people domestically, implying that some people must be brought in from outside. - Speaker 1 retorts that there aren’t enough talented people domestically. - Speaker 0 argues that you can’t simply take people off unemployment lines and place them in factories manufacturing missiles, asserting that this doesn’t work. - Speaker 1 asks how such work has been done historically. - Speaker 0 provides an example from Georgia: they raided to remove illegal immigrants and hadSouth Korean workers who needed batteries and were capable of producing them, noting that battery production is dangerous and complex, with explosions and problems. - Speaker 0 notes that they had five or six hundred people in the early stages to make batteries and to teach people how to do it, and that the aim was to get them out of the country. - Speaker 1 acknowledges disagreement, stating you can’t simply invest billions to build a plant and take people off unemployment lines who haven’t worked in five years to start making missiles, concluding that it doesn’t work that way.

Illegal immigrants cost taxpayers roughly $9,000 each, more than what we spend on Medicaid beneficiaries, vulnerable American citizens' healthcare, and military retirement benefits for veterans. This highlights the significant and unsustainable cost of the current border crisis, especially at the state and local levels. Translation: The cost of illegal immigrants to taxpayers is high, exceeding spending on healthcare for Americans and military benefits for veterans. This emphasizes the significant and unsustainable expense of the current border crisis, particularly at state and local levels.

Illegal immigration is costing American taxpayers $9,000 per immigrant, more than what is spent on Medicaid for vulnerable citizens. This fiscal irresponsibility needs to be addressed to prevent bankruptcy. State and local governments bear the brunt of the financial burden, leading to cuts in services or increased taxes for citizens.

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.

The speaker describes a scenario of a trendy illegal immigrant arriving at the U.S. Southwest border during the 2023 crisis, aided by taxpayer-funded NGOs, and released into the interior with a notice to appear in immigration court. He asserts the person will file a bare-bones, frivolous asylum application, aided by another NGO, and that due to a nearly 4,000,000-case immigration court backlog, the case will take years to be heard. In the meantime, the individual is said to move to a major city, receive taxpayer-funded benefits, commit crimes, be supported by sanctuary-city leadership, and be defended by Democrats who oppose strict immigration laws. The process allegedly drags on with continuances and motions, and years later an immigration judge supposedly denies the asylum claim. The individual is said to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which allegedly takes months or years, followed by appellate denial in a federal court of appeals. The speaker charges that federal departments and courts expend many taxpayer dollars on such cases, all to deport an apparently frivolous claimant. The focal policy proposal is the expedited removal of criminal aliens act, described as straightforward: criminal aliens cannot misuse the asylum system and must be detained and deported quickly if they are in the U.S. with certain criminal convictions. The speaker notes that current law already permits expedited removal for aggravated felon aliens, who are considered ineligible for asylum and relief and are presumed deportable; this is said to be constitutionally upheld by every federal court of appeals that has addressed it. The bill would expand categories of criminal aliens who may face removal proceedings when in criminal custody and authorize the Department of Homeland Security to place additional criminals in expedited removal. It would allow fast-track deportation for non-lawful permanent residents who are in a gang, transnational criminal organization, or foreign terrorist organization, or who have been convicted of dangerous crimes. The bill’s specified conviction categories include: any felony; any misdemeanor against a member of a vulnerable group; any assault on a law enforcement officer; any sexual offense; any crime of domestic violence; any stalking; any crime against children; sex trafficking or sexual exploitation of minors; sexual abuse of a minor; any activity involving child sexual exploitation; or any violation of a protective order. The term “vulnerable group” covers a child under 16, a pregnant woman, a person with severe disability, and seniors over 65. The speaker cites a poll claiming 78% of Americans support deporting illegal immigrants who have committed crimes, including nearly 70% of Democrats, and asserts broad public support for tougher immigration action while criticizing Democrats’ handling of border policy. He accuses Democrats of previously expanding border openings, cites alleged prior high border encounters, millions of entrants, and 2,000,000 “gotaways,” along with terrorists allegedly released and a record immigration court backlog, blaming the Democrats for a perceived border crisis. He argues recent House actions and votes against border-security measures and declares the bill a step toward securing the border and reforming immigration policy, urging support. He concludes by urging colleagues to back the expedited removal of criminal aliens act.

Speaker 0, Speaker 1, and Speaker 2 discuss immigration and U.S. foreign aid policy, focusing on roots, outcomes, and political implications. They begin with a provocative assertion: immigration is a major issue, with Speaker 0 claiming, “mostly with immigration… I wish people knew that we’re letting in criminals daily.” The speakers note migration as a central concern for the region, describing large U.S. aid to Central America—“4,000,000,000 over four years”—and acknowledging migrants now arriving from other places, including Venezuela. The dialogue questions the end goals of policy, asking, “What is the end goal? Why are they allowing children?” and “So what does he say to that?” along with a reference that “a lot of children” are involved. Speaker 2 mentions aid directed to female prisons in Mexico and to work on training, and to gender issues in Pakistan, noting initiatives to recruit, retain, and advance more women in law enforcement. A lingering question is asked: should U.S. taxpayers’ money be spent in their own country on these issues when they are described as fatal or concerning to others. The conversation shifts to specifics of administration and oversight: “Secretary Lincoln, how close are you to him? Five degrees separation.” The group references briefings on the FY2025 budget request and budget cycles, then reiterates the migration issue with a call to “stop migration.” They discuss a “root cause strategy” involving funding to address migrants at their origins, “Central America, basically,” aiming to support development there. A critical point is the assertion of substantial U.S. funding to the region and the concern that migrants are still coming from elsewhere, notably Venezuela, which “looks bad for the administration.” The dialogue notes the difficulty of finding a clear answer, with a sense that the other side might benefit politically. The speakers reflect on the scale of the funding relative to past decades and acknowledge uncertainty about what is effectively changing. There is talk of internal discussions with colleagues who manage migration processes and foreign assistance, with admissions of confusion or lack of clear messaging: “I don’t know what we do… there’s no clear answer.” They touch on messaging about immigration, including a belief that “we’re letting in criminals daily,” and contrast the status of “good, honest, hard work” Mexicans who stay in Mexico with others who come to the United States. Towards the end, Speaker 0 argues that traditional Americans—“Nebraska… Americans that have my family’s been in United States for four hundred years”—are not leftists, while stating that Latin Americans are leftist, framing it as a broader political and societal divide connected to immigration policies. They propose a hypothetical: allowing 100,000 Mexicans a year if they are not in the country illegally and have no criminal record, suggesting a quality filter on entrants.

One speaker believes there are two camps: one that views the U.S. as the world's policeman and another focused on domestic problems. One speaker believes the Biden administration has made decisions about the border, including flying people in using an app, which they find insane. They suggest a motivation for this is cheap labor, while acknowledging that some find the new Haitian workers in Springfield, Ohio, to be hard workers. However, they also claim this incentivized effort to move people into the country illegally will bring in gang members, cartel members, and terrorists, some of whom have already been arrested. Another speaker believes both Trump and Kamala Harris will have to act on the border, as the current situation is unsustainable. One speaker fears the goal is to give these immigrants a clear path to citizenship to buy their vote. They claim Democrats are incentivizing them with benefits like EBT cards and housing, which they are not giving to veterans and poor people in this country. They believe that if these people are given the opportunity to vote, especially in swing states, they will vote for the party that brought them to America.

The speaker claims there are millions of people in the country who need to be here, including criminals. The speaker states that there are probably 20,000,000 people in the country.

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.

The speaker asks Mr. Malnik how many deportations by the new administration would be objectionable. Malnik says a million would be a disaster, and two million would have severe negative ramifications, considering they would be law-abiding people who have been in the country for decades. The speaker states that President Obama deported nearly 5,000,000 people and asks if Malnik believes Obama was immoral and inappropriate for doing so. The speaker wants Malnik to state on social media that Obama did a horrible disservice to those he deported and was as wrong-minded as Republicans who want to secure the border and deport people. The speaker argues that one cannot be okay with one president deporting people but not another.

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.

- 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.

If law enforcement officers forsake their oath of office by failing to act when they see people swarming detention centers, obstructing traffic, burning cars, and trying to injure people, they are in violation of their oath. Mayor Bass and Governor Newsom are asked to state their position on the 12,000,000 people residing illegally in the U.S. amidst a $2,000,000,000,000 deficit, and what their solution is for the 300,000 to 500,000 people believed to have criminal records. The speaker questions the Mexican government's position, suggesting a bill to tax remittances, which could lead to higher taxes on these remittances. The speaker states that violent demonstrators believe they will be subsidized with social services to free up money to send to Mexico, its greatest source of foreign exchange, while the cartels kill between sixty and eighty thousand Americans. Gavin Newsom is accused of siding with people committing violence and pouring gasoline on a volatile situation.

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."

In the video, Speaker 0 states that around 1.4 million people without legal basis were expelled from the US last year, the highest number in recent history. Speaker 1 challenges this by pointing out that only 72,000 illegal migrants were removed in 2022, compared to 267,000 in 2019. Speaker 1 also highlights that border encounters have increased from 458,000 in 2019 to 2.3 million under the current administration. Speaker 0 responds by mentioning the success of their approach in providing lawful pathways and consequences for irregular border arrivals. They also mention that the public health authority in 2020 limited removals.

If you believe these people will boost the economy, you're mistaken. Where are the women and children? If they're fleeing their home countries, why aren't the women and children with them?