Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Special Election In New York's Third Congressional District; Senate Passes $95 Billion Foreign Aid Bill; House Republicans Block Vote On Foreign Aid Bill; Senate Bipartisan Vote On Foreign Aid Package; House Republicans Seek To Impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas; President Biden Urges House To Act On Foreign Aid Package; House Republicans Under Pressure To Pass Foreign Aid Bill. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired February 13, 2024 - 14:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:59]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: The race to replace the disgraced. Right now, New Yorkers are heading. To the polls for a critical special election to decide who will fill former Congressman George Santos' seat with major implications on the balance of power in the House.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is calling on House Republicans to support the $95 billion foreign aid bill that just passed in the Senate. But that funding for Ukraine and Israel and Taiwan remains uncertain as Speaker Mike Johnson has vowed to block the vote. And a worrisome partnership, to say the least. U.S. officials are sounding the alarm about the blockade. And it's not just about the blockade. The blooming ties between Russia and North Korea. We are following these developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN News Central.

SCIUTTO: Right now, voters in New York's third congressional district just outside of New York City are casting their ballots to replace indicted and expelled Republican George Santos. The special election today could hold some clues to understanding the 2024 general election. Republicans have the slimmest of House majorities. And this is a suburban district that won by eight points. So, a prime chance for Democrats to shrink that GOP margin.

KEILAR: But the political headwinds on several issues, like the economy and immigration, explaining why the race between Republican Mazie Pilip and Democrat Tom Suozzi is so tight here. Let's go there now with CNN's Athena Jones, who is at a polling site. Athena, now that the snow is letting up, has it gotten a little bit busier?

ATHENA JONES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Brianna. Well, maybe slightly. It doesn't look like it right now, though. I mean, we've seen a lot of activity looking like this. But just a few minutes ago, there were three people waiting in line at one of the tables. And that's the most people we've seen here all day. I'm talking to these poll workers, and they've said that this is the deadest it's been in the 10, 15 years they've been working. And they said that's partly because it's a special election, partly because of the snow that now has stopped so we could see a ramp up.

It snowed more than eight inches in Glen Cove, where we are right now. Because so many people voted early. More than 80,000 people cast early votes in the nine days of early voting. And these election workers were telling me that they were seeing 10 times the number of people come an hour, as they saw in the first six and a half or so hours here at this particular polling location. But this is an important race that many people are watching because they see this as this is one of those suburbs that is the kind of place that political observers believe will decide the next big election, the one in November for the White House and Congress. And this district makes up part of Nassau County and part of Queens.

The big issues here, immigration, the economy, inflation, abortion. I've spoken to several voters here.All of the ones who supported Mazie Pilip talked about immigration. And that is something that she has spent a lot of time and money talking about. All of the ads she put out dealt with immigration, attacking Suozzi as soft on the border. Voters telling me that Mazie Pilip is willing to be tough on the border, to close the border, Tom Suozzi isn't. Suozzi, for his part, has been trying to paint Mazie Pilip as kind of an unknown, maybe someone like Santos who might have ethics issues. She does not have as much name recognition, having served as a county legislator for just about two years.

Suozzi was mayor of Glen Cove, where I am here, Nassau County executive, and served in Congress for three terms. But as you mentioned, while Joe Biden beat Donald Trump by eight points in 2020, in 2022, George Santos, the man they're replacing, was able to beat his Democratic opponent by seven points. So, you can see how the tide has shifted a bit in this region, and why people are watching it so closely. So, we'll see when it all pans out who comes out on top, which party's message is really connecting and resonating with voters.

One more thing I'll tell you, my colleague Miguel Marquez caught up with Tom Swazi in Westbury, where he was doing a campaign event, and he asked Suozzi whether he thought the snow was helping him, and Suozzi gave a thumbs up. And then he explained saying that a lot of Republicans vote in the mornings. Democrats tend to vote in the afternoon and early. So, he's feeling pretty good, but we'll have to see how it all shakes out in this very, very close and closely watched race. Jim, Brianna.

[14:05:29]

SCUITTO: We'll see how it plays out this afternoon with Athena Jones. Thanks so much. President Biden is urging the House to act after the Senate passed a major foreign aid package. It includes $60 billion to support Ukraine in its fight against Russia, more than $14 billion in security assistance for Israel, $9.2 billion humanitarian assistance for civilians in Gaza, and other conflict zones.

KEILAR: The bill is now heading to the House where its prospects are grim, with Speaker Mike Johnson criticizing it because it does not include security measures that would help with the southern border crisis. Let's turn now to CNN chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju. Manu, tell us where things stand.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, there's just a lot of frustration, particularly among Republicans, given the divisions over the strategy here in a major showdown happening between Senate Republicans and House Republicans. Mike Johnson, you're right, he's demanding more border security measures. In fact, that's what he just told reporters just moments ago. But news, Johnson himself, his decision to effectively kill the Senate's bipartisan border security deal, that led Senate Republicans to scuttle that plan as well, saying there's no chance in the House because the President is not going to be a legitimate member of the Senate, because Mike Johnson says it does not go far enough and because Donald Trump opposes it, that we might as well shelve this plan. Then the Senate, over the last several days, has been pushing through this $95.3 billion measure dealing with Ukraine, dealing with Israel, and dealing with Taiwan. A bipartisan vote, 70 votes in the affirmative this morning, to get it over the finish line. But there is real tension around the ranks.

One of the people who held up the votes over the last several days was Senator Rand Paul, a fellow Kentucky Republican who took aim at Mitch McConnell himself, even as Paul himself found some fire trained at him as well. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): I don't support what he's doing here and I'm very outspoken. He's made a mistake. He's siding with Schumer and Biden.

RAJU: But after the election, you said there's a vote. After that, would you vote for bridge when we can?

PAUL: I can say right now he doesn't represent me or conservatives in Kentucky or conservatives across the United States. He's doing the bidding of Schumer and Biden.

SEN. JOHN FETTERMAN (D-PA): We're only here because of just one prick, and he decides that the rest of all of our schedules and our lives and holding up this bill to the getting to the House for all of this aid. It's incredibly frustrating, and there's no work being done. It's just bad performance art.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And Fetterman, of course, was referring to Rand Paul in that comment. Paul had been one of those handful of Republicans who have been outspoken in their criticism of this bill. Although it did not achieve a majority support among Senate Republicans, it did have significant support, given that McConnell supported some of his top deputies voted for this as well. And almost a majority here. Now pressure on the House to take action, even as the Speaker of the House has indicated he has no interest in taking up this plan unless they come up with some other proposal dealing with the border.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, I mean it wasn't long ago that Republicans across the board supported aid for Ukraine against the Russian invasion. On the House side, lawmakers are speaking about a discharge position to effectively get the House to vote on this, working around the Speaker without getting into too much detail. I mean, how convoluted a process is that? Is that one that has legs?

RAJU: It's very complicated. In fact, what it is essentially is it would circumvent the Republican leadership. Remember, the Speaker, the House Majority Leader is going to have to vote on the floor. The Speaker has indicated he's not going to put this Senate bill on the floor. So, what they can do is they can get 218 signatures. People, Democrats would need to get some Republicans on board to sign on to a petition, essentially putting this bill on the floor, forcing a vote on the floor. But this rarely succeeds. It takes a lot of time for it to play out.

Hakeem Jeffries, a Democratic leader, just told his colleagues he wants to use, quote, 'every available tool' to try to force a vote. But Jeffries himself is expected to lose Democratic support over the fact that the Israel portion of this aid package does not include conditions in providing Israel with that money. So, he's going to lose some Democratic support, meaning he has to get even more Republicans to back it to get that majority threshold. And Republicans, of course, facing pressure from Donald Trump, from their leadership not to sign on to this effort. So, a lot of questions about whether this can pass and whether they can actually circumvent Mike Johnson's opposition.

KEILAR: Yeah, we'll look and see if that happens, Manu. Thank you so much. Here in just a few hours House Republicans will try to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas again. You'll recall the GOP suffered what was a pretty embarrassing public defeat when a similar vote failed last week.

[14:10:19]

House Republicans claim that Mayorkas has committed high crimes and misdemeanors for his handling of the southern border, even though several constitutional experts have said the evidence does not reach that threshold. The House has not impeached a member of a president's cabinet in nearly 150 years. So, this is pretty extraordinary stuff that we are watching. We're joined now by Congresswoman Beth Van Dyne. She's a Republican from Texas. Congresswoman, thank you so much for taking the time to be with us.

You tweeted, we don't need new laws. We need to impeach Mayorkas and enforce the laws that are already working. So, if you don't need new laws, why did you vote for H.R. 2, which would be a new law, and call on the Senate to consider it?

REP. BETH VAN DUYNE (R-TX): Actually, H.R. 2 wasn't a new law. H.R. 2 is a mechanism that the House could use to force this administration to stop ignoring the laws and having the agency actually have to enforce the laws. That was our whole purpose. It was ridiculous that we even had to pass H.R. 2, but the purpose was is that the agency is specifically ignoring the laws, creating their own laws, not enforcing the laws. (CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: It's a bill, which if it passes, becomes a law. You're saying that was never the intention? Yes. Are you saying it was a memo or something --

(CROSSTALK)

VAN DUYNE: Oh, no, I'm saying the intention no, it was codifying, again, laws that this administration has been completely ignoring, starting with Mayorkas, which is why I'm confident that tonight we are going to be able to fulfil our commitment to impeach Mayorkas, because he's done untold damage by ignoring the law, circumventing the law, creating his own law. Specifically, with his catch-and-release program, we have seen damage not only to our national security, but the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans.

His catch-and-release program was never the law, he created that and as a result, instead of detaining illegal immigrants as they come over, he's been releasing them into our communities. Then you look at his parole. Again, we have a law regarding parole and he has completely abused that system.

KEILAR: Which law? Wait, so, you're saying that he just wasn't following laws, so you were just repassing?

VAN DUYNE: Not only just -- Not just following law.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Which law, specifically, is not following?

(CROSSTALK)

VAN DUYNE: His ability on paroles. It was always supposed to be on a one on a case by case basis. Instead, what his administration has done under his rule, because, you know, the Committee on Homeland Security has actually uncovered memos where he has sent Homeland Security memos to ignore the law and instead to follow his policy, which is instead of looking at parole on a case by case basis to have massive mass parole.

That was never the intent of Congress. Congress is in charge of actually passing laws and the agencies are in charge of it through funding from Congress in charge of executing those laws. He's specifically not doing that. And as a result, we have seen damage untold to our country. And again, the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans.

KEILAR: How so?

VAN DUYNE: I'm sorry?

KEILAR: The deaths of tens of thousands of Americans.

VAN DUYNE: We've had over one hundred and ten thousand Americans who have died as a result of fentanyl poisoning that has come in over our borders. We have had increases in crime across our country in cities all across our country where you're looking at people who have been killed by DUI

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Okay, but then lets talk about but don't you mean --

VAN DUYNE: -- by people who are here illegally, who are, you know, drinking while driving, under drinking and driving

KEILAR: But they are U.S. citizens

VAN DUYNE: and killing families who are beating our police officers.

KEILAR: Ma'am, those are U.S. citizens bringing the fentanyl in. Aren't you aware of this? It's more than -- it's an overwhelming the vast majority. Like. The vast majority of fentanyl is coming in with American citizens. If you are serious

(CROSSTALK)

VAN DUYNE: I know that fentanyl is coming in our borders right now because the Mexican cartel, the Mexican cartel

KEILAR: American, American citizens

VAN DUYNE: are the best friends of Mayorkas and are the ones who want to keep him in power because the Mexican cartel right now is in charge of our southern border. And they are making billions of dollars from bringing in drugs, sex trafficking, human trafficking and trial trafficking

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: American citizens --

VAN DUYNE: If we were -- if we were enforcing our laws at the border, this would not happen. Unfortunately, what we have is an administration and we've got a secretary who is completely creating their own laws and

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Which laws specifically mam?

VAN DUYNE: -- ignoring their laws.

KEILAR: Which law specifically is not being enforced such that fentanyl would not be coming in?

(CROSSTALK)

VAN DUYNE: So catch and release -- catch and release was an example.

KEILAR: Ma'am, American citizens. American citizens bring in fentanyl. VAN DUYNE: It is coming in from our southern border. Look, I'll tell you another --

KEILAR: American citizens are bringing it in.

(CROSSTALK)

Ma'am, no, no, let's go back to this. Seriously. Let's have an honest conversation here.

VAN DUYNE: Honest conversations. We have open borders right now. And as a result, --

KEILAR: You're saying -- we need to. I'm so sorry. The president has just walked out. I'm very sorry. We'll come back. I'm going to try to come back to this. We have to go to the president now he has just walked out.

[14:15:19]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOESEPH BIDEN, UNITED STATES PRESIDENT: This is a critical act for the House to move. It needs to move. The bill provides urgent funding for Ukraine so it can keep defending itself against Putin's vicious, vicious onslaught. We've all seen the terrible stories in recent weeks. Ukrainian soldiers out of artillery shells, Ukrainian units rationing rounds of ammunition to defend themselves, Ukrainian families worried that the next Russian strike will permanently plunge them into darkness or worse.

This bipartisan bill sends a clear message to Ukrainians and to our partners and to our allies around the world. America can be trusted. America can be relied upon. And America stands up for freedom. We stand strong for our allies. We never bow down to anyone and certainly not to Vladimir Putin. So, let's get on with this. Remember, the United States pulled together a coalition of nearly 50 nations to support Ukraine. We unified NATO, expanded it. We can't walk away now. That's what Putin's betting on. He just flatly said that.

Supporting this bill is standing up to Putin. Opposing it is playing into Putin's hands. As I've said before, the stakes in this fight extend far, far beyond Ukraine. If we don't stop Putin's appetite for power and control in Ukraine, he won't limit himself just to Ukraine. And the cost for America and our allies and partners are going to rise. For Republicans in Congress who think they can oppose funding for Ukraine and not be held accountable, history is watching. History is watching. History is watching. Failure to support Ukraine at this critical moment will never be forgotten. I want to be clear about something, because I know it's important to the American people.

While this bill sends military equipment to Ukraine, it spends the money right here in the United States of America, places like Arizona, where the Patriot missiles are built, and Alabama, where the Javelin missiles are built, and Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Texas, where artillery shells are made. And the way it works is we supply Ukraine with military equipment from our stockpiles, and then we spend our money replenishing that stockpile so our military has access to them. Stockpiles that are made right here in America by American workers. That not only supports American jobs and American communities, it allows us to invest in maintaining and strengthening our own defense manufacturing capacity.

Look, this bill meets our national security priorities in the Middle East as well and includes greater support for our troops serving in the region. We'll continue to defend against militia attacks backed by Iran, but it also provides Israel with what it needs to protect its people against a terrorist group like Hamas and Hezbollah and others. And it will provide life-saving humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people who desperately need food, water, and shelter. They need help.

Finally, this bill includes critical funding for our national security priorities in Asia, because even as we focus on the conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine, we must not take our eye off our national security challenges in the Pacific. It's the responsibility of a great nation, and we are a great nation that the rest of the world looks to. And I mean that. The rest of the world looks to us. The stakes are already high for American security before this bill was passed in the Senate last night. But in recent days, those stakes have risen. And that's because the former president has set a dangerous and shockingly, frankly, un-American signal to the world.

Just a few days ago, Trump gave an invitation to Putin to invade some of our NATO allies. And he said, if an ally didn't spend enough money on defense, he would encourage Russia to, quote, do whatever the hell they want, end of quote. Can you imagine a former president of the United States saying that? The whole world heard it. The worst thing is he means it. No other president in our history has ever bowed down to a Russian dictator. Let me say this as clearly as I can. I never will. For God's sake, it's dumb. It's shameful. It's dangerous. It's un-American.

When America gives us word, it means something. When we make a commitment, we keep it. And NATO is a sacred commitment. Donald Trump looks at this as if it's a burden. When he looks at NATO, he doesn't see the alliance that protects America and the world. He sees a protection racket. He doesn't understand that NATO is built on fundamental principles of freedom, security, and national sovereignty. Because for Trump, principles never matter. Everything is transactional. He doesn't understand that the sacred commitment we've given works for us as well.

[14:20:09]

In fact, I would remind Trump and all those who would walk away from NATO, Article 5 has only been invoked once, just once in our NATO history, and it was done to stand with America after we were attacked on 9-11. We should never forget it. You know, our adversaries have long sought to create cracks in the alliance. The greatest hope of all those who wish America harm is for NATO to fall apart. And you can be sure that they all cheered when they heard Donald Trump, when they heard what he said.

I know this. I will not walk away. I can't imagine any other president walking away. For as long as I'm president, if Putin attacks a NATO ally, the United States will defend every inch of NATO territory. Let me close with this. You've heard me say this before. Our nation stands at an inflection point, an inflection point in history, where the decisions we make now are going to determine the course of our future for decades to come. This is one of those moments.

And I say to the House members, House Republicans, you've got to decide. Are you going to stand up for freedom? Or are you going to side with terror and tyranny? Are you going to stand with Ukraine? Are you going to stand with Putin? Are you going to stand with America or with Trump? Republicans and Democrats in the Senate came together to send the message of unity to the world. It's time for the House Republicans to do the same thing, to pass this bill immediately, to stand for decency, stand for democracy, to stand up to the so-called leader, hell-bent on weakening American security.

And I mean it sincerely. History is watching. History is watching. And moments like today, moments like this, we have to remember who we are. We're the United States of America. The world is looking to us. There's nothing beyond our capacity. We act together. In this case, acting together includes acting with our NATO allies. God bless you all. May God protect our speakers. And I promise I'll come back and answer questions later. Thank you.

UNKNOWN: When Trump said that, sir, what did Putin do?

UNKNOWN: What's planned to be if the speaker doesn't act?

UNKNOWN: Sir, the opposition

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Strong words there from President Biden regarding U.S. aid for Ukraine, but also Israel and Taiwan. He says we can't walk away now. That's what Putin's counting on. And then he repeated three times. History is watching. History is watching. History is watching, saying it's a test not just for the country, for Republicans, for Congress. He took particular note of President Trump's, former President Trump's, goading Russia to attack NATO allies in those comments over the weekend. He says the worst thing is he means it. And he says he himself, he won't walk away from Ukraine. So strong words from the president there, hoping to push House Republicans now to act as the Senate did.

KEILAR: That's right. He's pushing them to move this supplemental when it comes to security for Ukraine and Israel. I want to bring back in Congresswoman Beth Van Dyne from Texas. We were interrupted before by the president. That happens sometimes. But just to revisit our conversation here and also to jump off of something we heard the president say there.

He has a message for you and your House colleagues that you need to move and to pass this bill for aid for Israel and for Ukraine. And we were discussing how you had said that you or we, the U.S., doesn't need new laws when it comes to securing the border. But Speaker Johnson is actually saying that House Republicans won't vote for this Ukraine and Israel aid without border security provisions. He's talking about what would be, if passed, new laws? He's talking about new laws.

VAN DUYNE: So, again, what we're forcing this administration to do is do its job. We're having to pass H.R. 2 because this administration has flagrantly ignored the law, created its own law. And so, what we're having to do with H.R. 2 is do things like actually have the catch and release program removed, which is added by this administration, have the parole rules of a case-by-case basis recodified, because this administration continues to defy it. Make sure that they understand that we have to have support for our local and our state law enforcement officers, partner with them.

And look, I've got a lot of experience in this. I was a mayor before. I was in Congress. I was the mayor of Irving, Texas. And we had a fantastic partnership with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, where we actually worked with them to remove criminal illegal immigrants in our communities because we saw the amount of crime that was being caused. We saw the people that they were preying upon was other people that were in our country illegally.

[14:25:29]

As a result of that partnership, our crime rate dropped and we became the fifth safest city in the country. Those partnerships work. Enforcing our laws work. What we have seen is the exact opposite under this administration, and you have seen people dying.

KEILAR: Let me stop and ask you about this. A couple things. First off, illegal immigrants' criminal conviction rate is 45 percent below that of native-born Americans in your state, just to be clear. When you raise the spectre of they create so many crimes, they're convicted. When it comes to violent crimes, property crimes, homicides, sex crimes, you talked in the past about rapes, the numbers just don't support that. But let's focus on catch and release.

(CROSSTALK)

VAN DUYNE: But your argument is we're defending those people who are here illegally.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: So let's focus on -- Can we focus on catch and release because I do think

VAN DUYNE: You brought up the question. I just want to make sure we're responding to it.

KEILAR: I just fact checked something you said

VAN DUYNE: It sounds like you're defending those immigrants who are here illegally that were beating our police officers. (CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: It sounds like you're -- no, I am -- no, excuse me. I did not say that.

(CROSSTALK)

VAN DUYNE: It's not okay, and they should not be in our country.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Ma'am, I absolutely do not think that is okay. And anyone watching that video, I think, should look at that and absolutely say that's not okay. So, I think you're really misunderstanding where I'm coming from. No, that's not okay. Let's talk about catch and release. This is obviously huge for Republicans and really for anyone who is concerned about border security. But when you look at catch and release, you have to look at what's causing it. And it's a judicial backlog, right, of people who are coming, and they are applying for -- excuse me, I let you speak -- who are coming to protect or coming and looking for protection. There's not enough room for everyone. So, you have them being released. But the law that you said you don't need, the Senate deal, had it passed and become law, would have prevented that. It would have actually upped that credible

(CROSSTALK)

VAN DUYNE: No, actually it wouldn't have.

KEILAR: It would have actually upped that credible -- it would have upped that credible fear thrust

VAN DUYNE: No, it actually wouldn't have.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: It would have upped that credible

VAN DUYNE: No, it actually wouldn't have.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Excuse me it would --

VAN DUYNE: It would have allowed 5,000 people in our country a day.

KEILAR: No, that's not true. That's not true and the boarder patrol council

(CROSSTALK)

VAN DUYNE: Which is five times as much as was coming through during the Trump administration

KEILAR: Ma'am, may I please speak? Or I'm going to have to cut this -- if you won't let me speak, I'm going to cut the interview off. And I will let you speak in finished sentences.

VAN DUYNE: That's will be great, thank you.

KEILAR: Okay? Okay? And please, please give me that respect as well.

VAN DUYNE: Thank you very much.

KEILAR: So, what I will say is the Border Patrol Council disagrees with you. They've been very frustrated with what you are representing as 5,000 people. That is actually a trigger, right? Which is actually -- we're above it right now on the border. So, it's not as you represent it. But what you would have is a credible fear threshold that would be increased such that you would actually -- and it would also create positions at the border to more quickly process people. So, you would -- yes, you would have some people granted asylum and more quickly, but you would also have people kicked out of the U.S. in greater numbers and more quickly.

VAN DUYNE: Can I respond?

KEILAR: Sure. I finished my sentence.

VAN DUYNE: So, Brandon Judd is actually a friend of mine, and I recognize the fact that they are desperate right now for resources. And they are willing to pass a bill that gives them additional resources that have been denied them by this administration. And it's actually the numbers that you're talking about, the 5,000 that we have worse numbers now. Under the Trump administration, it was less than 1,000. They want to codify 5,000 and make that normal. Do the math.

That's 2 million people nearly coming through our borders illegally every year. That is not enforcing our laws. That is not shutting down our border. That's not actually listening to asylum claims where 80 percent to 90 percent of those who make the asylum claims actually don't even fit the rules for laws for asylum. But what that is doing is allowing up to 5,000 people, and actually it's even more than that, 5,000 on average a week, but it was 8,500 in a day could come before those laws were triggered, before those limits were triggered. That is not --

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: That's in any single day (ph)

VAN DUYNE: That is not closing our borders. That is not enforcing our laws. That is actually increasing the numbers to the catastrophic level that we have right now, the crisis level that we have right now. That's 2 million people entering our country illegally every year is what this bill would have done, which is why it never even got out of the Senate for the House to even vote on it.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: You

VAN DUYNE: But the fact is, is that we are having to go to these ridiculous measures to force an administration to secure our borders because it absolutely does not want to do that. And making the statement that there's somehow -- because more people who are here legally commit crime than people who are here illegally is almost as ridiculous as Biden's suggesting that Mexico is by the Gaza Strip. It's a ridiculous argument. People should not be here illegally, and when they are, they should be removed. Instead, what we're seeing is crime increasing.