評(píng)論
打印
I'm joined now by Senator Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Chairman, good to see you tonight. Thank you for being here. Thank you. So, I want to get first your response to this blame pointing over this tragic photo, and what it tells you about where we are in this -- in this battle? One is disgusting, this is not the president's fault. People from Central America are being enticed to come here in record numbers, where we double the number of people have come this year versus last, at this stage of last year. And we're gonna double that again. We're gonna spend four point something billion to deal with the humanitarian crisis if you don't change the laws, they'll keep coming. I hate it very much that this father and daughter died. But, they should -- they should stay in their country, we should help them in their country. This journey they're taking is very dangerous. So, to my Democratic colleagues, if we don't change our law, you're gonna have millions of people overrunning our border. And what are you gonna do about that? Yeah. We're gonna talk more about tonight. And you know, everybody is waiting for Congress to come up with some kind of solution. It's been decades, I mean. And as they -- you can tell the frustration-- It's ridiculous.-- that I hear in your voice and we heard it today on the Hill. Yeah. And these people are pawns, sadly, in this political -- Can I just say this? Yeah, go ahead.
Here is our law. If you get one foot in the United States, you claim asylum, you're entitled to a hearing. The hearing is like three years away. People don't show up. If you're bringing the small child, we can only hold the child for 20 days. We don't want to separate families, so we let the entire family unit go. Word is out on the street in Central America. If you small -- bring a small child to the United States and ask for asylum, you're never gonna be sent back, you stay in America forever. And until we change that law, nothing changes. And it leads to some of the tragedies that we're seeing. Yes. Because people feel that it's gonna work and it entices them, as you say. I want to talk to you about the Mueller testimony that's coming up on July 17th. I thought he was pretty emphatic when he said -- Yeah.-- you know, my testimony is this report. Then, Jerrold Nadler kept coming out and saying, you know -- no, he's gonna show up, he's gonna testify. So, I'm curious what you think transpired what. What do you think motivated Robert Mueller to accept what is -- by their own description, a friendly subpoena an agreement to come. Really, I don't know. But I do know this. If he stays within the four corners of the document, what good is his testimony? If he goes outside the document, he's gonna get killed politically. Because then he becomes a political commentator. So, if he does what he said he would do in his press conference, refer back to the document, this is just a political circus. This is not about trying to find the truth, this is about setting up impeachment of President Trump. The biggest loser of Mueller coming into the House, I think, it's Nancy Pelosi. Because it's gonna be harder for her to control her troops after Mueller testifies.
譯文由可可原創(chuàng)，僅供學(xué)習(xí)交流使用，未經(jīng)許可請(qǐng)勿轉(zhuǎn)載。
