The Biden administration has announced an immigration proposal that's pretty
reminiscent of policies that were implemented under Donald Trump.
Now the new restrictions, and restriction really is the key word here,
will largely bar migrants who traveled through other countries on
their way to the US-Mexico border from applying for asylum in the United States.
This is going to impact tens of thousands of migrants and refugees.
And the whole idea is, listen, if you have to travel through
another country to get to us, why don't you stay at that country?
Just stay there, that's the policy, which is pretty bad.
>> That seems exactly like the Trump policy.
>> 100%, right?
>> There are- >> I'm sure there's some difference you're
getting too, but thus far- >> Small differences, but I wanna
be clear, the small differences are mostly because of federal judges, okay?
So federal judges have weighed in on this matter and have stated that you can't
implement this policy when it comes to unaccompanied minors, for instance, okay?
So luckily we have some decent federal judges left, but
let me give you the details on what Biden is doing.
So the proposed rule would presume asylum ineligibility and
encourage migrants to avail themselves of lawful safe and
orderly pathways to the United States,
of which there are few by the way, or otherwise to seek asylum or
other protection in countries through which they travel.
Thereby reducing reliance on human smuggling networks that exploit migrants
for financial gain, according to the text of the regulation.
So those who don't meet the strict asylum eligibility requirements under
the proposal would be subject to quick deportation, no questions asked.
Now there are some exceptions.
I mentioned the unaccompanied minors.
Other individuals who would be exempt from this policy include those with acute
medical emergencies, imminent and extreme threat of violent crimes if they're
worried about being victims of that, being a victim of human trafficking or
other extremely compelling circumstances.
So those are the exemptions that the Biden administration has laid out.
Now how are they defending this policy?
Especially after we heard from campaign Biden saying that he's going to be far
more humane when it comes to asylum seekers compared to Donald Trump.
Well, a Biden administration official told CNN this, to be clear,
this was not our first preference or even our second,
these temporary measures are being taken out of necessity.
The Homeland Security and Justice Departments argued that surging
numbers of migrants left them little choice.
They anticipate illegal crossings to climb to between 11,000 and
13,000 a day if no action is take after Title 42 ends.
And Title 42 is gonna end because it should end guys.
I mean, Title 42 was implemented during COVID to stop
the spread of COVID by people traveling to the United States.
And then the COVID emergency ended with Title 42 remained in place,
you know what I'm saying.
So like the idea for the Biden administration is, well once it's
officially lifted, then we're gonna have this surge of migrants coming to
the border and we need to find a way to prevent them from coming to the border.
So John, thoughts on this.
>> I get why they might think that that's a good explanation for
changing from the rhetoric on the campaign to what they have right now.
But it kind of seems like if what you said is we're not gonna be barbaric to people,
okay, we're gonna be different, wait,
there's a lot of people, okay we're gonna be barbaric to a lot of people.
How is that the explanation that it was wrong when Trump did it,
but if there's more people to do it to, it becomes fine.
There's no alternative, there's nothing else that you can do.
I mean, you can just say, hey, what are you gonna do,
we have to look at it after ourselves, but
don't try to pretend that there's some sort of moral underpinning to this.
>> I love that you mentioned that because that is exactly what we're
seeing right now.
The moral underpinning, just using their
alleged morality to justify this policy.
So the administration portrayed these efforts as a way to protect migrants from
the dangerous journeys as they travel north to the United States and
allow the US border entry points to manage the migrant flows in a safe and
efficient manner.
But critics have said that they wanna use an app by the way to have them basically
registers and schedule an appointment to- >> Without having to come in person?
>> Right, yeah.
They're like listen, we have a solution, just download the app, okay?
Because I'm sure that the migrants coming to the border like have the resources,
the technology, like just the ability to do that, to rely on an app in order
to schedule an appointment to appear at a border entry point.
>> Exactly, and then super easy to just get there at that particular time.
Yeah, and if you try to get one of these things from like two countries away,
your chances are probably really high.
I mean, so you have an app, good.
Well, I was worried that this was barbaric.
>> So- >> And also by the way,
we wanna have this policy so they don't even bother coming,
is just a slightly more complex version of Trump giving a speech saying don't come.
That's what they would say.
Stephen Miller would write the speeches for him, don't come.
This is just a tech bro adjacent version of the argument that was being made by
the Trump administration.
>> That's what this appears to be, but at the same time,
this issue is far more complicated and nuanced than anyone will admit to, right?
So listen, everyone wants to be mad at Biden, but
understand that to solve the immigration policy,
to solve our immigration issues, we need legislation by Congress, right?
So let's talk about the reaction from democrats to what bidden is doing, okay?
Because the reaction from democrats is a strongly worded letter from Miller J Paul
and Jerry Nadler wrote a strongly worded letter to Joe Biden.
I don't care about your strongly worded letter, and neither does Joe Biden,
quite frankly, okay?
If you're not going to actually do your jobs and legislate, pass immigration
reform, which we obviously desperately need, then that's it.
Like we're gonna keep kicking the can down the road,
we're gonna keep implementing inhumane policies.
And look guys, let's also keep it real, right?
I feel like the left oftentimes when it comes to this issue has like just let
everyone in idea except we don't have like endless resources for that.
There needs to be some policy to restrict the flow of people coming into
the country.
It's just the fact of the matter.
We don't have enough housing, we don't have enough resources.
I'm not gonna lie to you and tell you like, no,
we should totally have an open border policy, it'll be totally fine.
That's not the reality of the situation.
At the same time though,
we do have people in the country who are of undocumented status.
We need to have a discussion about,
first of all how they get abused by companies, they get underpaid.
Oftentimes less than minimum wage and they don't have the ability to report them to
the authorities because they're worried about being deported.
We need to do something about that.
Like the entire system is broken and there hasn't even really been a debate in
Congress about immigration reform since 2013.
>> Yeah, I might amend what you had said to rather than they need to do
something now which seems inconceivable.
>> It is inconceivable.
>> And even if it was conceivable, what I might concede is that any bill that would
come out of this Republican House would be far worse than a barbaric status quo.
Maybe I might be wrong, I doubt it.
I also think, look, if you're talking about solving the migration problem or
whatever, I don't think, and I know that you don't,
they probably want that conversation to be bound to how thick is the wall gonna be.
I think that we obviously need to go way broader than that,
including potentially like housing can be built, we have hundreds and
hundreds of additional billion dollars to spend on our defense budget over and
above any reasonable need to secure America.
So in theory, if money were to be allocated to a holistic view of dealing
with migration and integrating people in the communities throughout America,
I mean, there's a lot of resources that could be there in theory.
>> But those resources don't go toward those-
>> In the same way that an immigration
bill doesn't get talked about or voted on.
Both of these things are purely speculative.
>> My point is this issue is not gonna be solved unilaterally by the executive
branch because the executive branch doesn't have the ability to solve it
unilaterally.
You need congressional action.
Congress is useless.
Congress is useless, they love to bitch and moan about this issue, but
they do nothing about it.
Whether you're talking about democrats or republicans, okay?
So that's the problem here, and it's an incredibly frustrating situation to
talk about because all the focus is also on the southern border, which I get,
some people their visual like they want to visualize the problem, right?
We just need a wall, the wall will solve everything.
Except it won't, it won't guys, it won't solve everything, okay?
I need people to understand that the vast majority of undocumented immigrants in
the country right now didn't cross the southern border.
They flew in and they stayed here.
>> So the wall is gonna have to be really tall then?
>> I mean I don't know, do we do an iron dome to prevent people from coming in?
>> Marjorie Greene has already taken out her crayons and
she's sketching out what it's gonna look like.
>> God, she's so dumb.
Okay, so let me give you the numbers go to graphic seven here.
Data from the Center for Migration studies shows that two-thirds of the nation's
10.2 million unauthorized immigrants entered legally either with a visa or
a permit, but they overstayed.
>> Yeah, yeah, but caravan, but caravan.
>> It's just this issue has been boiled down to culture war theater when
in reality we're talking about human lives and we're not talking
about actual comprehensive legislation to deal with it effectively.
>> No, nor will we soon.
Can I ask you a super quick question?
Do you think it's one or the other of this thing or a mix, and if so, what mix?
He's doing this because it's in a vain quest to get the approval of republicans
who will never give it to him no matter what he does.
If he were to stand on the border wall with a massive flamethrower
burning up migrants, they would still boo him, or
like he thinks this is necessary, I need to do this, I'm gonna do this.
It is honest or not?
I think Biden, in my opinion, I think it's pretty obvious that Biden
has tried to run away from the immigration issue and he's getting hounded by it.
And so he has to address it, and I don't know,
I think he's at this point smart enough to understand that he's never
gonna get the approval from his republican colleagues or whatever.
But I think he just wants them to ease off a bit and
at least provide the appearance that he's doing something about migration.
But make no mistake about this, this is just almost a photocopy
version of what Trump did, with a few exceptions.
And it's incredibly sad because again, we're not talking about inanimate objects,
we're talking about human lives and we're talking about people fleeing oftentimes
incredibly dangerous, violent situations in their country.