She is ignorant of actual, written LAWS. Asylum seeking is legal, you are not an asylum seeker if you illegally cross a border. Thats like breaking into a house and shooting the homeowner out of self defense. BASIC LAW, those who break the laws cannot invoke their rights on further actions down the line as they are doing illegal activity in the first place.
Except he lied. It is not illegal to seek asylum even if entry is not through a standard port of entry. These people have done nothing illegal if they seek asylum and they should not be separated from their children. It's immoral.
East Bay Sanctuary vs Trump. Page 21 of the federal courts decision when they reversed Trumps policy of separating children from asylum seekers who crossed the border between check points. "Congress’s determination that place of entry not be disqualifying to an application for asylum is consistent with the treaty obligations underlying §1158’s asylum provisions. Congress enacted the Refugee Act of 1980, including 8 U.S.C. §1158, “to bring United States refugee law into conformance with the 1967 United Nations Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 19 U.S.T. 6223, T.I.A.S. No. 6577, to which the United States acceded in 1968.” Because the Protocol is not “self-executing,” it “does not have the force of law in American courts.” Khan v. Holder, 584 F.3d 773, 783 (9th Cir. 2009). Nonetheless, it provides “a useful guide in determining congressional intent in enacting the Refugee Act.” Id.(citation omitted); see also Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. at 436-37.Of particular relevance here, Article 31of the Protocol provides: The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of [A]rticle 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.19 U.S.T. at 6275 (emphasis added).Considering the text and structure of the statute, as well as the interpretive guide of the U.N. Protocol, reveals Congress’s unambiguous intent. The failure to comply with entry requirements such as arriving at a designated port of entry should bear little, if any, weight in the asylum process. The Rule reaches the opposite result by adopting a categorical bar based solely “[a]n alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters) shall be deemed for purposes of this chapter an applicant for admission.” Inadmissible aliens are generally placed in full removal proceedings"
Yeah.... Because people are allowed to claim asylum either at the border or while in the country. Dumbell answering the questions was trying to equate someone getting arrested for DUI to someone legally claiming asylum while in the country. For a person with half a brain there should be a lag that someone is stupid enough to not comprehend it.
In the first minute of the video she made the point that family separation is illegal according to international treaties signed by the USA, confirmed by the law professor in the hearing. So how exactly was she 'put in het place'? Homan should just be honest and say he intentionally violates international treaties.
@@Maxvk1000 Everything he said is true, if we arrest someone for DUI no matter what if they have a kid in the car, they are being seperated by the LEO because the parent is going to jail. We cant stop enforcing the law because its inconvenient. Its there for a purpose, and thats to keep other people safe. Same scenario if that person kills one of your family members in a drunk crash you are going to be angry as all hell.
@@Maxvk1000what she is doing here, is a trained tactic of negotiation…she has just 1 solid point to make and she sticks to it, even if someone else buffs her statement. For example, there would be no need at all, to remove people or their families from this country under duress, if they just simply went through the US Border Policy Program to begin citizenship but they will not do that…. Because they will not put in the time, finances and effort to become a citizen, they are brought in illegally or cross illegally. Does that make sense to you? That’s why she got put in her place in this regard.
@@805uploadz "international law is clear that family unity should be prioritised" - direct quote from the professor in the hearing. The inconvenient part here is that Homan signed a memo recommending the option to violate international law in order to deport migrants. Worse, he does not appear to be aware of this. He doesn't know, or wilfully ignored, the legal framework he is supposed to operate in.
So much stupidity,how did she get there? She’s unaware that all criminals, including ilegal immigrants, are separated from their kids when they go to jail?
She's not concerned with facts. She is only concerned with trying to elicit an emotional response, no matter how nonsensical her line of reasoning is. Apparently she believes that the best way to commit crimes and stay out of jail is to have a child, so that you can't be separated by being put in jail.
She also doesn't seem to understand the concept that law enforcement doesn't write laws. Legislators write and vote on laws. So it doesn't make sense when a legislator gets angry at a law enforcer for enforcing laws passed by legislators. I feel like I'm explaining this to a child.
@@akbananachucker2441 Okay. Actually DJT's speeches are full of anti-Europe and Pro-Russia+North Korea+India etc. Not only DJT, even his supporters speak the same language. That's why I assumed that.
AOC - After the 2024 election your squad is down 2 members. In 2026 you will be gone too, as will be your entire squad. America can do better- you cannot - GOODBYE
@ Harris was the one who raised $1billion for her Campaign … NOT TRUMP .. and she ended it $ 20 Million in debt … AOC is intellectually dishonest and a hack … she will be gone in 2026 …
@@Count990 you realise that this separation policy was reversed in federal court after this hearing, and she was 100% correct, and he's lying to defend a Trump.
@@RossJames-i6s I see, enforcing the law now makes you a mental patient, and here I thought justice is blind and holds a scale. just remove your immigration law and border laws all together let's see how sane that is
@@RossJames-i6s You do know this is a constitutional republic. A nation of laws. This guy enforces them. Why do dems take issue with laws and obeying the constitution?
if the border was secure there would be no adults and no children. if someone wants asylum do it from outside the country and do it legally. Enough is enough.
@@33percentgod It's not about empathy and compassion, illegal immigration is destroying the United States, that is something objective and clear, if you defend illegal immigration by simply saying that "seeking asylum is legal" you are insane. When emotion overrides simple and reasonable logic it's insanity, there needs to be a balance between them, and this woman is incapable of putting her emotions aside.
Yes you did. East Bay Sanctuary vs Trump. Page 21 of the federal courts decision when they reversed Trumps policy of separating children from asylum seekers who crossed the border between check points. "Congress’s determination that place of entry not be disqualifying to an application for asylum is consistent with the treaty obligations underlying §1158’s asylum provisions. Congress enacted the Refugee Act of 1980, including 8 U.S.C. §1158, “to bring United States refugee law into conformance with the 1967 United Nations Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 19 U.S.T. 6223, T.I.A.S. No. 6577, to which the United States acceded in 1968.” Because the Protocol is not “self-executing,” it “does not have the force of law in American courts.” Khan v. Holder, 584 F.3d 773, 783 (9th Cir. 2009). Nonetheless, it provides “a useful guide in determining congressional intent in enacting the Refugee Act.” Id.(citation omitted); see also Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. at 436-37.Of particular relevance here, Article 31of the Protocol provides: The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of [A]rticle 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.19 U.S.T. at 6275 (emphasis added).Considering the text and structure of the statute, as well as the interpretive guide of the U.N. Protocol, reveals Congress’s unambiguous intent. The failure to comply with entry requirements such as arriving at a designated port of entry should bear little, if any, weight in the asylum process. The Rule reaches the opposite result by adopting a categorical bar based solely “[a]n alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters) shall be deemed for purposes of this chapter an applicant for admission.” Inadmissible aliens are generally placed in full removal proceedings"
@@scottfarner5100 Spare me the avalanche of copy and paste legal text. Crossing the border illegally is still BREAKING THE LAW, and drowning everyone in U.N. protocols won’t magically legitimize it. If these so-called “asylum seekers” had a VALID CASE, they’d follow the proper process instead of sneaking in and expecting a free pass. No amount of courtroom citations can change that fundamental fact.
You need both sides, to also keep those now in power in check and challenged. Like Sith Lord sidious said; those with power will always be afraid of losing it
When criminals are arrested and jailed, then their kids are not thrown into jail cells with them. Wake up. I'm a former chief psychologist of a state prison system and never saw the kids of criminals thrown into jail with mom and dad. Wake up.
If someone robs a bank with there kids in the car, stealing with kids in the store, dealing drugs around children, all breaking the law and get there children taken away. What's the difference for a person who ILEGALLY entered the country! Long live the USA! Let's go brandon!
No that is what idiots hear, what she said is that asylum seekers can not be penalized for crossing the border and requesting asylum and she is correct.
@donkeytime1704 the point of crossing between checkpoints is to be arrested and make the request for asylum. Immigrants are legally allowed to do that without penalty. For non asylum seekers the violation is a misdemeanor that carries a civil penalty. There should not be any separations at all. And to do it to asylum seekers is immoral and was in violation of US immigration law.
@@scottfarner5100 Always different interpretations under the circumstances that you just last spoke on. Without risk of separation, enter the port of entry as was recommended so the process may go much more expediantly. Instead of taking this to another argument, maybe we can convey a conversation to influence a way to make progress. There are rules that many countries have and must take steps to understand the differences so we can go forward without setbacks. This is where laws must be understood of different countries.
Gotta love when Tom leaves her speachless because HES CORRECT. Trump's building a dream team and man, it can't be more glorious. RFKJr head of all the health agencies, Tom Homen head of borders.. Elon head of DOGE. Keep it comin!!
@TrumpMagus Would also love to see Tulsi the head of the FBI, she's perfect for it. Vivek head of State Dept. Tucker, press Secretary. Trump make it happen!
AOC was recently talking with a young lady and asked her if she has any children. The young lady said yes, I have one that's just under two. AOC replied I'm not stupid, I know what one is.
@scottfarner5100 Correct, but entering the country illegally is illegal. Which means it’s a crime, which means they’re not following the law. Which means you can now be separated from your family. Who would’ve thought
@ what a weird point to stand on with republicans just to get a word and yes why should they get special treatment when the citizens here don’t unless they come from money got nothing to do with politics it’s about rights and why should they have more rights for being here illegally. That’s why Kamala lost cause she full of BS just like AOC
@@scottfarner5100That's not true and you know it. Several days ago a democratic woman reported a man because his pet squirrel had a Trump hat on. A dem. Judge issued a warrant to confiscate his pet squirrel ( peanut) and his raccoon friend, Fred. A government agency in NY. ransacked this man's house for 5 hours. Took his pets and had them killed. If the dems. would do that to an animal, pictured what they would do to you.
The guy is on point. Also, people speaking about being human needs to understand that if we make it into a policy that such a thing should not be done, then anyone wanting cross illegally can use it. We would be allowing people to exploit children to get into the country illegally and remain there. So the most reasonable position is to indeed separate. The parents or those pretending to be parents have committed a crime.
If I was a migrant and I knew Tom Homan was coming for me I would be shaking in my shoes. Those migrants will be running and hiding like chickens with no heads once Trump is officially president. 😂run rabbit run 😂
It's worse than you think, the people who planned and ran this 'open border' policy deliberately wanted children to be 'lost in the system'.. why do you think they immediately stopped DNA testing of children that was meant to enable them to be identified if they were Not being accompanied by their parents or even family? This meant that They have used the apparatus of the govt's agencies' itself as an enabler of child trafficking‼️
@@GeeGee19watching the 5:00 news here in Houston, it showed video of Mexicans just stopping in their tracks, hearing Donald Trump had won and turned right around and started heading back, they've also started shipping them back from New York... I think the mayor of New York is working with Trump
She was voted based on ethnic lines in her district (which happens to be the 14th congressional district of new york) which is majority hispanic/latino Thats basically the reason
East Bay Sanctuary vs Trump. Page 21 of the federal courts decision when they reversed Trumps policy of separating children from asylum seekers who crossed the border between check points. "Congress’s determination that place of entry not be disqualifying to an application for asylum is consistent with the treaty obligations underlying §1158’s asylum provisions. Congress enacted the Refugee Act of 1980, including 8 U.S.C. §1158, “to bring United States refugee law into conformance with the 1967 United Nations Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 19 U.S.T. 6223, T.I.A.S. No. 6577, to which the United States acceded in 1968.” Because the Protocol is not “self-executing,” it “does not have the force of law in American courts.” Khan v. Holder, 584 F.3d 773, 783 (9th Cir. 2009). Nonetheless, it provides “a useful guide in determining congressional intent in enacting the Refugee Act.” Id.(citation omitted); see also Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. at 436-37.Of particular relevance here, Article 31of the Protocol provides: The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of [A]rticle 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.19 U.S.T. at 6275 (emphasis added).Considering the text and structure of the statute, as well as the interpretive guide of the U.N. Protocol, reveals Congress’s unambiguous intent. The failure to comply with entry requirements such as arriving at a designated port of entry should bear little, if any, weight in the asylum process. The Rule reaches the opposite result by adopting a categorical bar based solely “[a]n alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters) shall be deemed for purposes of this chapter an applicant for admission.” Inadmissible aliens are generally placed in full removal proceedings" §1158. Asylum (a) Authority to apply for asylum (1) In general Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien's status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(b) of this title...
She is irritating me.. they can take child with him/ her! Nobody is keeping illegal immigrant children here .. they d know law and still trying to cheat making kids here …
In many nations, when families come to try for a permanent residency and fail to get accepted, the whole family goes back to their own country. It’s a common sense. No one is separating the family. Normally families move together. If they choose to separate their own family, it’s on them.
@@johnhoran9840 When an unaccompanied minor is apprehended CBP has 72 hours to turn them over to family services who must quickly find family or a sponsor to take that child. Once that child has been turned over to that family or sponsor that ends the government’s responsibility to that child. The Government does make a 30 day check in call to those children or sponsor. The child and sponsor are not required to take or return the call. The government reported during a short period of time that a percentage of calls went unanswered. A reporter took that percentage against the total number of unaccompanied minors’ apprehensions and came up with that bogus number of children who the government lost contact with. The Right decided to change that wording from lost contact to missing children then conflated it with the story of minor children working.
@@johnhoran9840 Here is what is true Trumps immoral separation policy was snatching children from asylum seekers using the legal process, and they did lose those children and didn't reunite them.
@1:41 "I had to dig further and our staff dug further." Translation: "I got some unpaid intern to spend their weekend digging through old files under the threat of making their lives a living hell."
He is good on dealing with brainless people, for sure.
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."
_~Mark Twain_
The new guy is a Terminator..he will close the Border and AOC will implode lol
We need him for when Zombies try to overun us
Congrats to co-President Musk, a real billionaire that will show a FAKE billionaire how to get things done. GO ELON!
By just answering them and letting them talk 😂
She is painfully unimpressive.
Poop
👌
Like the girl who didn't do any work on the group project and shows up acting confident on presentation day
Congrats to co-President Musk, a real billionaire that will show a FAKE billionaire how to get things done. GO ELON!
She is ignorant of actual, written LAWS.
Asylum seeking is legal, you are not an asylum seeker if you illegally cross a border. Thats like breaking into a house and shooting the homeowner out of self defense.
BASIC LAW, those who break the laws cannot invoke their rights on further actions down the line as they are doing illegal activity in the first place.
It started with Obama!!!!! Remember the cages??
Yes, but I'm pretty sure Homan will take care of it once and for all
But they blamed it on Trump remember that
@@debbysalemi1657 And they still do!
Racial division started with Obama.
Yeah… I remeber hearing about this long before Trump was in office. On a side note, AOC got schooled 😂
AOC made the mistake of questioning an intelligent person.
😂
it felt so good, Tom Homan schooling this woman...
She should go back to bartending.
She should go to jail. Treason. She is a threat to our democracy
Its incredible how she was just reelected again and she won overwhelmingly 260,000 votes vs 140,000 votes for her opponent.
onlyfans
Genuine question: How did this woman end up as a US representative with prior irrelevant bartending experience?
@@SamS101-e6x She is good looking, intelligent and not very honest ... very common to the type
“The same as every US citizen that gets arrested with a child” absolutely froze her in her tracks lmao
Except that what he said was false.
show us where a guy has EVER got arrested in the US and his kids got booked into jail with him, lol
@@Cyber-Odyssey Oh is it? If I commit a crime and go to prison, does my child come with me?
Yes a DUI will get you separated. Kids are not coming to jail with you. You also put them in a dangerous situation and CPS may very well get involved.
Except he lied. It is not illegal to seek asylum even if entry is not through a standard port of entry. These people have done nothing illegal if they seek asylum and they should not be separated from their children. It's immoral.
She's not mentally equipped for this conversation
Neither is the low informed Right wing base, and she is correct.
@scottfarner5100 she's not remotely correct.
Good news is, he's the new border czar.
@@scottfarner5100 There's a new sherrif in town!
Neither is a trashcan but the can is still smarter! Simple facts.
East Bay Sanctuary vs Trump. Page 21 of the federal courts decision when they reversed Trumps policy of separating children from asylum seekers who crossed the border between check points. "Congress’s determination that place of entry not be disqualifying to an application for asylum is consistent with the treaty obligations underlying §1158’s asylum provisions. Congress enacted the Refugee Act of 1980, including 8 U.S.C. §1158, “to bring United States refugee law into conformance with the 1967 United Nations Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 19 U.S.T. 6223, T.I.A.S. No. 6577, to which the United States acceded in 1968.” Because the Protocol is not “self-executing,” it “does not have the force of law in American courts.” Khan v. Holder, 584 F.3d 773, 783 (9th Cir. 2009). Nonetheless, it provides “a useful guide in determining congressional intent in enacting the Refugee Act.” Id.(citation omitted); see also Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. at 436-37.Of particular relevance here, Article 31of the Protocol provides: The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of [A]rticle 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.19 U.S.T. at 6275 (emphasis added).Considering the text and structure of the statute, as well as the interpretive guide of the U.N. Protocol, reveals Congress’s unambiguous intent. The failure to comply with entry requirements such as arriving at a designated port of entry should bear little, if any, weight in the asylum process. The Rule reaches the opposite result by adopting a categorical bar based solely “[a]n alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters) shall be deemed for purposes of this chapter an applicant for admission.” Inadmissible aliens are generally placed in full removal proceedings"
He's SUCH a boss! SOOOO good have him back working for us!!
Her brain lagging like a computer, after Holman's answer regards to her statement, people seeking asylum is priceless, 😂😂😂hahaha
Yeah.... Because people are allowed to claim asylum either at the border or while in the country. Dumbell answering the questions was trying to equate someone getting arrested for DUI to someone legally claiming asylum while in the country. For a person with half a brain there should be a lag that someone is stupid enough to not comprehend it.
Wrong. Asylum is not unconditional!
She must live under a rock! Most of these people that bring these children over are not their parents’
Biden stopped all DNA testing at the border.
Correct. Joe ended DNA testing at the border on his first day in office.
That's a lie.
Kamala stopped the DNA process, we used to be able to know. They'd swab them at the border.
Correct over 50 percent are not a biological relative
Congratulations Mr. Homan on your promotion! Well done!
BS!
He actually put her in her place about the law.
Nope, that would be bent over a bartending table...
In the first minute of the video she made the point that family separation is illegal according to international treaties signed by the USA, confirmed by the law professor in the hearing. So how exactly was she 'put in het place'?
Homan should just be honest and say he intentionally violates international treaties.
@@Maxvk1000 Everything he said is true, if we arrest someone for DUI no matter what if they have a kid in the car, they are being seperated by the LEO because the parent is going to jail. We cant stop enforcing the law because its inconvenient. Its there for a purpose, and thats to keep other people safe. Same scenario if that person kills one of your family members in a drunk crash you are going to be angry as all hell.
@@Maxvk1000what she is doing here, is a trained tactic of negotiation…she has just 1 solid point to make and she sticks to it, even if someone else buffs her statement. For example, there would be no need at all, to remove people or their families from this country under duress, if they just simply went through the US Border Policy Program to begin citizenship but they will not do that…. Because they will not put in the time, finances and effort to become a citizen, they are brought in illegally or cross illegally.
Does that make sense to you? That’s why she got put in her place in this regard.
@@805uploadz "international law is clear that family unity should be prioritised" - direct quote from the professor in the hearing. The inconvenient part here is that Homan signed a memo recommending the option to violate international law in order to deport migrants. Worse, he does not appear to be aware of this. He doesn't know, or wilfully ignored, the legal framework he is supposed to operate in.
Thank you sir beast mode!!! 🇺🇸
She got cooked.
AOC tried to do a "gotcha" moment with that guy and reminded everyone of just how smart she is.
her jaws shut up really quick
She is not dumb. She knows what she is doing
She didn't know what a garbage disposal was and was literally scared of it. She is most definitely NOT the sharpest tool in the shed.
You mean she was correct he lied and you have no clue what they are talking about
@@scottfarner5100 She was embarrass and lower her eye pursing lips when she was unmasked.
So much stupidity,how did she get there? She’s unaware that all criminals, including ilegal immigrants, are separated from their kids when they go to jail?
She's not concerned with facts. She is only concerned with trying to elicit an emotional response, no matter how nonsensical her line of reasoning is. Apparently she believes that the best way to commit crimes and stay out of jail is to have a child, so that you can't be separated by being put in jail.
Undocumented immigrants are not criminals. That's like calling someone who has a parking ticket a criminal.
She also doesn't seem to understand the concept that law enforcement doesn't write laws. Legislators write and vote on laws. So it doesn't make sense when a legislator gets angry at a law enforcer for enforcing laws passed by legislators.
I feel like I'm explaining this to a child.
She is not qualified to be in this conversation as she has zero idea what is entailed.
But she soon will.
Right?! She's DEI at it's finest.
He is a beast. This is going to be fun.
LFG!
Yes.
But Why is American is aspiring to become a Team Russia?
@@NoExpertHere it's not. We have nothing to do with them. Separate country
@@akbananachucker2441 Okay. Actually DJT's speeches are full of anti-Europe and Pro-Russia+North Korea+India etc. Not only DJT, even his supporters speak the same language.
That's why I assumed that.
@@NoExpertHereyou're still in about a proven hoax from years ago?
Homan’s answer is so savage
I will be so glad when Republicans are sworn in and can boot AOC off of any committee appointments.
AOC - After the 2024 election your squad is down 2 members. In 2026 you will be gone too, as will be your entire squad. America can do better- you cannot - GOODBYE
Thank God! 🙏🏻🙏🏽🙏🏾🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸👏🏼👏🏽👏🏾
No she will not. Billionaires have a firm grip on the party. She is an asset
@ Harris was the one who raised $1billion for her Campaign … NOT TRUMP .. and she ended it $ 20 Million in debt … AOC is intellectually dishonest and a hack … she will be gone in 2026 …
Really👌...same billionaires thought Kamala was an asset💩...How did that go😂😂😂😎
@@gdiwolverinemale4th she is something that starts with those 3 letters!
Mr. Homan is the final boss you don't want to mess with.
Can't wait for him to mop the floor with Newsome with Elon chuckling in the background..😂
10 million hit points.
Awaken my masters!
Beyond time to remove her.
And this is WHY America voted for Trump!
I never trusted her ....
She really thought she'd done something special there 🤡
Exposed Trumps immoral policy that Honan was defending. It was layervremoved in federal court.
She thinks every word that comes out of her mouth is groundbreaking. 🙄
Y’all realize this was in 2019? Five years ago. She has gotten much better and more intelligent at public speaking since.
@@Count990 you realise that this separation policy was reversed in federal court after this hearing, and she was 100% correct, and he's lying to defend a Trump.
@@Count990 Lol...
Mr Homan is a tough Law & Order Patriot💥❤❤❤
In sane countries he is referred to as a mental patient.
@@RossJames-i6s And what is a sane country? Details please.
@@user-nu4lo5li1c Any secular democracy where there is a limit an the amount of$$ a business or individual can contribute to a political party.
@@RossJames-i6s I see, enforcing the law now makes you a mental patient, and here I thought justice is blind and holds a scale. just remove your immigration law and border laws all together let's see how sane that is
@@RossJames-i6s You do know this is a constitutional republic. A nation of laws. This guy enforces them. Why do dems take issue with laws and obeying the constitution?
She is fighting for the wrong country….. she needs to be removed
Her loyalty is not with the USA.
Yes! 100% 💯
@@erics9754very obviously.. her loyalty is to her self belief.
He even knows the code number...epic
All time favorite clip. 🇺🇸
if the border was secure there would be no adults and no children. if someone wants asylum do it from outside the country and do it legally. Enough is enough.
And provide the necessary paperwork which shows who is who, child and parent.
@@schirmc1 dna test
And provide proof that they are eligible for asylum. Being poor isn't good enough
@@schirmc1 This all started with Barrack , he didn't have the right paperwork either!
@@ralphowens4510 Isn't that right!
She's just a child playing in the adults sandbox.
What's concerning, is she's one of the few adults.
@@LearningStudent-ey4of Maybe in a bar full of 21 year olds. Big maybe. Oh wait... that was where... nevermind.
Can someone please get rid of this woman
How would you like to see that happen exactly?
She's stupid. Don't understand the law. Why is she there to begin with?
@@kyjuan89VOTED OUT OF OFFICE... INCOMPETENT
@@butterflyblue7761 the way they put it, asking someone to get rid of her, sounded more violent than just voting her out
@@kyjuan89 political bloodbath sounds BAD tooo... Those of us who follow politics understand....
Securing borders should be paramount for any country.
She got embarrassed and quickly changed the subject.
That woman is absolutely insane.
Fails to see what's really happening....
Stupid
Why we have take care of everyone on earth?
Good to know you consider empathy and compassion "insane."
@@33percentgod It's not about empathy and compassion, illegal immigration is destroying the United States, that is something objective and clear, if you defend illegal immigration by simply saying that "seeking asylum is legal" you are insane. When emotion overrides simple and reasonable logic it's insanity, there needs to be a balance between them, and this woman is incapable of putting her emotions aside.
@@33percentgodi don't have much compassion for criminals. Especially the ones that insist their crime was "just".
I love this guy.
Does not a give a damn about the rhetoric.
Something needs to be done to fix the issue and while congress dances we work.
She a bartender for sure.....
Don't compare her with bartenders. They're friendly and mostly responsible in doing they're job.
I think she was just a waitress.
An insult to my bartender who provides intelligent conversation and a good view while I drink my coldie.
@@trollhunter8842 they work hard too :(
..under the table
She got owned in the face
Seeking Asylum is not illegal...when it is done LEGALLY! I guess she missed that part! LOL
Yes you did. East Bay Sanctuary vs Trump. Page 21 of the federal courts decision when they reversed Trumps policy of separating children from asylum seekers who crossed the border between check points. "Congress’s determination that place of entry not be disqualifying to an application for asylum is consistent with the treaty obligations underlying §1158’s asylum provisions. Congress enacted the Refugee Act of 1980, including 8 U.S.C. §1158, “to bring United States refugee law into conformance with the 1967 United Nations Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 19 U.S.T. 6223, T.I.A.S. No. 6577, to which the United States acceded in 1968.” Because the Protocol is not “self-executing,” it “does not have the force of law in American courts.” Khan v. Holder, 584 F.3d 773, 783 (9th Cir. 2009). Nonetheless, it provides “a useful guide in determining congressional intent in enacting the Refugee Act.” Id.(citation omitted); see also Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. at 436-37.Of particular relevance here, Article 31of the Protocol provides: The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of [A]rticle 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.19 U.S.T. at 6275 (emphasis added).Considering the text and structure of the statute, as well as the interpretive guide of the U.N. Protocol, reveals Congress’s unambiguous intent. The failure to comply with entry requirements such as arriving at a designated port of entry should bear little, if any, weight in the asylum process. The Rule reaches the opposite result by adopting a categorical bar based solely “[a]n alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters) shall be deemed for purposes of this chapter an applicant for admission.” Inadmissible aliens are generally placed in full removal proceedings"
@@scottfarner5100 Spare me the avalanche of copy and paste legal text. Crossing the border illegally is still BREAKING THE LAW, and drowning everyone in U.N. protocols won’t magically legitimize it. If these so-called “asylum seekers” had a VALID CASE, they’d follow the proper process instead of sneaking in and expecting a free pass. No amount of courtroom citations can change that fundamental fact.
AOC is getting cooked 😂
💯
and she still was re-elected. Just goes to show the type of braindead constituents she has.
She has got to go
I prefer her right where she is at and has been since elected . Powerless and Comedic material for everyone to laugh at
Can we just fire AOC?
You could recall her???
You need both sides, to also keep those now in power in check and challenged. Like Sith Lord sidious said; those with power will always be afraid of losing it
When criminals are arrested and jailed, then their kids are not thrown into jail cells with them. Wake up. I'm a former chief psychologist of a state prison system and never saw the kids of criminals thrown into jail with mom and dad. Wake up.
Vote her out .she's incompetent
So happy that the adults are going to be running America in 2025. Enough of these stooges.
Tom Homan is a star ⭐️
All are welcomed to enter LEGALLY Miss AOC. That is LEGALLY. Just like EVERY OTHER NATION on the planet.
If someone robs a bank with there kids in the car, stealing with kids in the store, dealing drugs around children, all breaking the law and get there children taken away.
What's the difference for a person who ILEGALLY entered the country!
Long live the USA!
Let's go brandon!
Holman shut her up🤣
Shut her down! 😂
🇺🇸💪Tom💪🇺🇸
Don't send your children by themselves
Maybe kidnapped or sold..who knows?
She said that illigal immigrants do nothing illegal )))
😂
No that is what idiots hear, what she said is that asylum seekers can not be penalized for crossing the border and requesting asylum and she is correct.
Without being arrested, enter the port of entry as he mentioned.
@donkeytime1704 the point of crossing between checkpoints is to be arrested and make the request for asylum. Immigrants are legally allowed to do that without penalty. For non asylum seekers the violation is a misdemeanor that carries a civil penalty. There should not be any separations at all. And to do it to asylum seekers is immoral and was in violation of US immigration law.
@@scottfarner5100 Always different interpretations under the circumstances that you just last spoke on. Without risk of separation, enter the port of entry as was recommended so the process may go much more expediantly.
Instead of taking this to another argument, maybe we can convey a conversation to influence a way to make progress. There are rules that many countries have and must take steps to understand the differences so we can go forward without setbacks. This is where laws must be understood of different countries.
Who voted this woman? I can’t believed she’s sitting there
blame people in Bronx and Queens, those are her districts.
Thank God we've re-elected President Trump. AOC is finished.
She is a lawmaker that doesn't know the law.
Gotta love when Tom leaves her speachless because HES CORRECT. Trump's building a dream team and man, it can't be more glorious. RFKJr head of all the health agencies, Tom Homen head of borders.. Elon head of DOGE. Keep it comin!!
@TrumpMagus Would also love to see Tulsi the head of the FBI, she's perfect for it. Vivek head of State Dept. Tucker, press Secretary. Trump make it happen!
Homan is lying and defending Trumps immoral policy that was reviersed in federal court 6 years ago.
Lee Zeldin head of EPA.
This young lady... send these people to her.
Forbes....Old but Gold...
Her argument is insane.
Do criminals take their children with them to the institutions they are assigned to?
AOC was recently talking with a young lady and asked her if she has any children.
The young lady said yes, I have one that's just under two.
AOC replied I'm not stupid, I know what one is.
She's embarrassing.
😂😂😂😂
Was this 4 real? 😂
@@RitaWil
Nah it's a joke, but you do have to stop and ask right.
😂😂😂
She came to an intelligent debate unarmed.
AC is an embarrassment to this country!!! Bartending is her calling!!!
Tom Homan...great pick.
Worst of all these people think they sound smart, it's so pathetic it hurts my guts
If Americans can be separated from their kids, so can immigrants.
No we don't separate children from parents who follow laws, unless you are a republican.
@scottfarner5100 Correct, but entering the country illegally is illegal. Which means it’s a crime, which means they’re not following the law. Which means you can now be separated from your family. Who would’ve thought
@@scottfarner5100Entering the country illegally is breaking the law.
@ what a weird point to stand on with republicans just to get a word and yes why should they get special treatment when the citizens here don’t unless they come from money got nothing to do with politics it’s about rights and why should they have more rights for being here illegally. That’s why Kamala lost cause she full of BS just like AOC
@@scottfarner5100That's not true and you know it. Several days ago a democratic woman reported a man because his pet squirrel had a Trump hat on. A dem. Judge issued a warrant to confiscate his pet squirrel ( peanut) and his raccoon friend, Fred. A government agency in NY. ransacked this man's house for 5 hours. Took his pets and had them killed. If the dems. would do that to an animal, pictured what they would do to you.
I love him!! 💗
Tom Homan verbally smacked her around and she had to move on. 4:52
Is he reading a script? Why won't he look at her when he is talking ? 🤷
@@justbecause502same as everyone in there
@justbecause502 notes... did you ever take notes for a presentation in school... or notes in general, bud?🤷
Fire AOC. What a clown.
Don’t mention the word “clown” when you don’t mention Donald Trump
@@EduardoReyes-bx6ly good one…
@@EduardoReyes-bx6ly Lol so funny and hilarious never heard that one before not once in my whole life
TDS at it's finest
AOC 🤢🤮
She will be powerless now that Republicans have control of everything
I can't stand this woman 😡
They are trying so hard to set him up but he always fires back way harder. Thank you Homan
Yes he lies a lot and the right wing media has been over playing his old lies.
I can't stand that Bartender 😭😭😭 Her Chipmunk voice is worse than Kamala, get rid of her !
Nothing is worse that Kamala
Chipmunk and Vocal Fry
Is AOC helping the United States citizens or Illegals?
I'm so confused 🤨😐🤔
The guy is on point. Also, people speaking about being human needs to understand that if we make it into a policy that such a thing should not be done, then anyone wanting cross illegally can use it. We would be allowing people to exploit children to get into the country illegally and remain there. So the most reasonable position is to indeed separate. The parents or those pretending to be parents have committed a crime.
@TrumpMagus😂😂😂😂😂
If I was a migrant and I knew Tom Homan was coming for me I would be shaking in my shoes. Those migrants will be running and hiding like chickens with no heads once Trump is officially president. 😂run rabbit run 😂
It's worse than you think, the people who planned and ran this 'open border' policy deliberately wanted children to be 'lost in the system'.. why do you think they immediately stopped DNA testing of children that was meant to enable them to be identified if they were Not being accompanied by their parents or even family? This meant that They have used the apparatus of the govt's agencies' itself as an enabler of child trafficking‼️
@@GeeGee19watching the 5:00 news here in Houston, it showed video of Mexicans just stopping in their tracks, hearing Donald Trump had won and turned right around and started heading back, they've also started shipping them back from New York... I think the mayor of New York is working with Trump
@TrumpMagushe is lying to defend Trumps immoral policy. His separation policy was reversed in federal court.
How do we even know if the adults are their parents? We just take their word for it that they are not trafficing these kids?
Send them back together,
Epic.
They shouldn't be aloud to just walk across to begin with then there would have been no separation. Not rocket science
Allowed - permitted to do something
Aloud - spoken in a volume adequate enough to be heard
all owed - everyone said "ow!"
How did people vote for her
My grandparents did. Such fools. They never would've voted for her if they were alive.
She was voted simply because she's POPULAR. Popularity is never a good reason to vote for someone into office.
@@joepowell4288 they don’t care I guess
For entertainment in the House
She was voted based on ethnic lines in her district (which happens to be the 14th congressional district of new york) which is majority hispanic/latino
Thats basically the reason
Don't you get it!! The PARENTS are responsible! Bar tender cat with no children! She knows that parents have total responsibility!
East Bay Sanctuary vs Trump. Page 21 of the federal courts decision when they reversed Trumps policy of separating children from asylum seekers who crossed the border between check points. "Congress’s determination that place of entry not be disqualifying to an application for asylum is consistent with the treaty obligations underlying §1158’s asylum provisions. Congress enacted the Refugee Act of 1980, including 8 U.S.C. §1158, “to bring United States refugee law into conformance with the 1967 United Nations Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 19 U.S.T. 6223, T.I.A.S. No. 6577, to which the United States acceded in 1968.” Because the Protocol is not “self-executing,” it “does not have the force of law in American courts.” Khan v. Holder, 584 F.3d 773, 783 (9th Cir. 2009). Nonetheless, it provides “a useful guide in determining congressional intent in enacting the Refugee Act.” Id.(citation omitted); see also Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. at 436-37.Of particular relevance here, Article 31of the Protocol provides: The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of [A]rticle 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.19 U.S.T. at 6275 (emphasis added).Considering the text and structure of the statute, as well as the interpretive guide of the U.N. Protocol, reveals Congress’s unambiguous intent. The failure to comply with entry requirements such as arriving at a designated port of entry should bear little, if any, weight in the asylum process. The Rule reaches the opposite result by adopting a categorical bar based solely “[a]n alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters) shall be deemed for purposes of this chapter an applicant for admission.” Inadmissible aliens are generally placed in full removal proceedings"
§1158. Asylum (a) Authority to apply for asylum (1) In general Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien's status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(b) of this title...
Love Tom!! 😭😭😭
They shouldn’t have come illegally.
Saying she is a bartender, it's offensive for the bartenders that actually know how to make good cocktails
Is she serious? Her party opened the door. It's our house and we can kick people out who don't come from here.
When they started coming in the border, the family was already separated. There are a lot of kids missing,
She is irritating me.. they can take child with him/ her! Nobody is keeping illegal immigrant children here .. they d know law and still trying to cheat making kids here …
In many nations, when families come to try for a permanent residency and fail to get accepted, the whole family goes back to their own country. It’s a common sense. No one is separating the family. Normally families move together. If they choose to separate their own family, it’s on them.
someone remove her from her position I am sick and tired of her
This is from 2019 but when it's them with 300,000 missing children, it's silent, crickets...hmmm...hmmmm.
Because that was a lie too.
@@scottfarner5100 Prove it was a lie.
@@johnhoran9840 When an unaccompanied minor is apprehended CBP has 72 hours to turn them over to family services who must quickly find family or a sponsor to take that child. Once that child has been turned over to that family or sponsor that ends the government’s responsibility to that child. The Government does make a 30 day check in call to those children or sponsor. The child and sponsor are not required to take or return the call. The government reported during a short period of time that a percentage of calls went unanswered. A reporter took that percentage against the total number of unaccompanied minors’ apprehensions and came up with that bogus number of children who the government lost contact with. The Right decided to change that wording from lost contact to missing children then conflated it with the story of minor children working.
@@johnhoran9840 Now prove it's true
@@johnhoran9840 Here is what is true Trumps immoral separation policy was snatching children from asylum seekers using the legal process, and they did lose those children and didn't reunite them.
Zero tolerance
I love how she just moved on after knowing she won't win with Homan using lunatic argument
She just irritates the crap out of me
Another helluva fighter has join Trump's team in charge of border.
Please go back to bartending
@1:41 "I had to dig further and our staff dug further."
Translation: "I got some unpaid intern to spend their weekend digging through old files under the threat of making their lives a living hell."
AOC is pathetic
Thank you Tom Homan
I met a person who believed that this woman spoke with intelligence..... I walked away..
Tom is the man we need