'Levin' on border, immigration

close

Video

Marco Rubio slams Biden for hypocrisy on immigration

Florida Republican criticized the administration for telling Cubans not to come to the United States while opening the southern border

This is a rush transcript from "Life, Liberty & Lenin," July 25, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARK LEVIN, FOX NEWS HOST: Hello, America. I'm Mark Levin and this is LIFE LIBERTY & LEVIN.

We have a very important show for you tonight. We have two great guests who are coming up: Senator Marco Rubio and Tom Homan, the former acting I.C.E. Director.

But before we get to our great guests, there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of you who are very concerned about what's happening to this country.

I want to report to you that my book, "American Marxism" was number one in "The New York Times" bestseller list, hardcopy; number one on "The New York Times" bestseller list, e-book and hardcopy. Number one on Canadian book lists, believe it or not. It has outsold the next 15 books, nonfiction books combined.

First week sales of 400,000 in all formats, 400,000 of you have taken the time to acquire the book, are reading the book, and want to know how to save the country and I'm with you.

One of the aspects of the book that I have yet to discuss, which is actually, Chapter Six: The Media. You know, I wrote an entire book on the media called "Unfreedom of the Press," but this chapter is different and it's very important, because if we had a media in this country, there are a few exceptions, but a few exceptions.

If we had a media in this country that were honest, that were actually reporting news, we wouldn't be in the situation we are today with what's going on in our classrooms, what's going on in our borders, how the Democratic Party is trying to monopolize our politics, and crush all commerce. How Big Tech is trying to silence people with different opinions, the war on free speech, the war on academic freedom, and on and on and on, we'd have a real media that was trying to protect the Republic and protect our principles.

That's the purpose of the First Amendment and a Free Press, not the great propagandists who support the ideology of these spawned American Marxists movements that I write about in the book. And so I thought I'd spend a few minutes talking about what I've said in the book about the media, because this is a big topic as far as I'm concerned.

Now, let's begin this way. Let's start with "The New York Times."

"The New York Times" is considered the gold standard of the media. Everybody in cable TV, everybody in the networks, the other newspapers and so forth, they all read "The New York Times." In Washington, D.C., it's the first paper to pick up and read. It has an enormous amount of influence on the Democratic Party and on the culture.

It is pushing the 1619 Project, which is pushing the destruction of our founding and the destruction of our youth. It has an enormous amount of power does, "The New York Times." But what is "The New York Times"?

It's a corporation. What kind of corporation is it? It is a diabolical corporation. Why is it a diabolical corporation? Because it has supported some of the most heinous genocidal movements that mankind has ever known. Did you know that?

Well, now you know it and I'm going to demonstrate it.

I demonstrate it in "American Marxism," and I've demonstrated it before in "Unfreedom of the Press." But let me go outside my own books and point out.

Here we have a piece, "How the 'New York Times' helped hide Stalin's mass murders in Ukraine."

Ladies and gentlemen, I've written about this. They had a reporter by the name of Walter Duranty, who was headquartered in Moscow for 12 years. He was Stalin's lap boy. Stalin -- he was on Stalin's payroll. Stalin would tell him what to write for "The New York Times." He tried to protect Stalin.

Stalin provided him with women, provided him with food, provided him with a car. The management of "The New York Times" knew about a lot of this, but they never took steps to stop it.

He would write pieces that were absolute propaganda from Moscow, particularly in 1932, when Joseph Stalin was trying to starve the Ukrainian peasants.

You see, the Ukrainian peasants own their own land, and they were their own farmers, and they didn't buy this Marxist stuff. They weren't prepared to give up their land to the communal that is to the Russian regime in Moscow. And Stalin gave up shooting them, there were just too many to shoot. So, he decided to starve them and kill them that way.

And so in all of these, one talked about how he would hear the Ukrainians were trying to get into Gulag, that's how desperate their situation was. There was cannibalism and so forth. Millions of Ukrainians were slaughtered. Millions of Ukrainians died of hunger in the most horrific ways.

"The New York Times" man in Moscow covered all that up. He said in passing that they had a bad harvest. And he said about Stalin, sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet. You've heard of that before? That was Walter Duranty.

And for his reporting, Walter Duranty got a Pulitzer Prize. He got a Pulitzer Prize that the Duranty family and "The New York Times" refused to give up.

But that's not all, less than a decade later, "The New York Times" was at it again. "The New York Times" Nazi correspondent. This is in the "Tablet. "As Adolf Hitler rose to power in Germany and then embarked on his program of world conquest and mass extermination, 'The New York Times' Berlin bureau chief was busy slanting the news in his favor. His name was Guido Enderis. "The New York Times" bureau chief in Berlin was in many ways a mouthpiece for Hitler and the Third Reich.

"The New York Times," for most of the Holocaust did its best to cover up the Holocaust as Hitler was trying to exterminate all European Jews, as other newspapers around the world were trying to bang the pots and pans and draw the world's attention to it, it is not exactly as if Adolf Hitler was keeping it secret.

If you were a regular subscriber and reader of "The New York Times" through most of the Holocaust, you had no idea what was taking place there. Whenever they covered it, it was in the back pages. They would talk about local news on the front pages and so forth.

And in some ways, they were doing FDR's bidding, the Great Democrat who wanted less information out about the Holocaust, if possible. That's "The New York Times" and two massive genocides.

What else about "The New York Times"? Cuba has been in the news. Cuba is another genocidal regime. People there want to be free, and that regime will not allow them to be free. But what does "The New York Times" have to do about it?

"The New York Times" had another reporter by the name of Herbert Matthews, and he helped build the legend of Fidel Castro. Fidel Castro was losing. He and a band of a couple dozen guerillas were in the mountains, hiding out and had been badly beaten. And so what happened?

While that government, the Batista government claimed that Castro was dead, Matthews, "The New York Times" reporter wrote this glowing piece about Castro that he is still alive, that he is fighting that, that he has built this army -- he was completely deceived, this Matthews, but he was in love with the whole notion of this romantic revolution, and Castro, said he was a Democrat, he was rising up to take out the military regime and so forth. It was a glowing article.

And Matthews wrote in that article, "The personality the man (Castro) is overpowering. It was easy to see that his men adored him, and also to see why he has caught the imagination of the youth of Cuba all over the island." He didn't catch the imagination of anybody.

"Here was an educated, dedicated fanatic, a man of ideals of courage and remarkable qualities of leadership."

And so the interview helped Castro, as Reuters even pointed out, by exaggerating the size of his rebel force, and Castro would later brag of how he duped "The New York Times."

Stalin, Hitler, and Castro -- "The New York Times" was on the wrong side of all three propping up or covering up for all three. The paper of record, all the news that's fit to print, "The New York Times."

Now this is important to understand because "The New York Times" hasn't changed ownership. It's the same family, it is very incestuous that is handed down from one to the next, and their ideology is very un-American as it has been in the past.

They don't embrace Republicanism. They don't embrace unalienable rights. They don't embrace the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. They embrace the spawned American Marxist movements, every damn one of them.

Critical race theory, LatCrit, the trans-movement, open borders, the attack on capitalism, and on and on and on. You read "The New York Times," you read about what these spawned American Marxist movements have to say and what this administration is up to.

Now, in Chapter Six of "American Marxism," I point out that's "The New York Times." How corrupt the media can be.

Did you know that Karl Marx, his career, he was a journalist? He was a journalist. Let me read this short bit of information to you so you have it along with the rest of the information. As I write: "Writing in Jacobin magazine, a self-described socialist publication. Steven Sherman notes that Marx was a journalist more or less all of his adult life. He started writing for the 'Rheinische Zeitung' in 1842 and founded his own paper in 1848."

"His work for the (New York) 'Tribune' came about because he'd met an American newspaper editor Charles Dana, (who would later go on to edit 'The New York Sun') in Cologne in 1848. A few years later, Dana asked Marx to contribute some articles to 'The New York Tribune' on the situation in Germany."

And he contributed hundreds and hundreds over the course of many years. He said, "I think that Marx and Engels view 'The Tribune' as a way to publicize their views and influence debate with a large number of readers."

"In an interview with James Ledbetter, the editor of 'Dispatches' for 'The New York Tribune,' a 2008 book of Marx's articles for the 'Tribune,' Ledbetter explains that the basic Marx approach to his 'New York Tribune' column was to take an event that was in the news, an election, an uprising, the second Opium War, the outbreak of the American Civil War, and sift through it until he could boil it down to some fundamental questions of politics or economics."

"And then on those questions, he would make his judgment. In this sense, Marxist journalism does resemble some of the writing that is published today in journals of opinion, and it is not hard to see a direct link between Marxist journalistic writing and the kind of tendentious writing on public affairs that characterize much political journalism, (especially in Europe)," and I would say, especially here, " ... in the 20th century."

So Marx's approach to journalism, as I write, well, it's very similar to modern journalists today, isn't it? That is, "He was unencumbered by commitment to actual news reporting and status reporting, which shaped the news around his own opinions and ideology. After 1848, Marx learned the power of counter revolution, writes Ledbetter and began to believe that existing systems of government and economy could not be overthrown until a relatively informed and organized proletariat could be mobilized to do so."

So, the media to be used as propaganda.

"This became clear with every passing year in many nations, such organization was decades away if it existed at all."

So I point out, "In short, Marx understood the power of mass communication and the need to control it and shape it, to frame events and opinion. In other words, the purpose was to propagandize, not inform."

I have much more on this in "American Marxism." I hope you'll take a look at it.

A corrupt media is poison to a free country. With some, but few exceptions, we have a thoroughly corrupt media led by "The New York Times," but they're not the only one.

The reason I wrote "American Marxism" was to get around that corrupt media to get around the oligarchs that run big tech, so we can communicate directly with each other about what's going on in this country and what we can do about it.

Those of you who don't have a copy, I hope you'll go get a copy of "American Marxism."

I'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEVIN: Welcome back, America. Senator Marco Rubio, it is a pleasure to have you.

SEN. MARCO RUBIO (R-FL): Thanks, Mark.

LEVIN: I want to discuss Cuba, if you can imagine, of all things.

You know, Senator Rubio, not enough has been said if we take a step back and look at history, at the media's role of installing this communist regime in Cuba, particularly a guy by the name of Herbert Matthews, particularly "The New York Times" and they seem to have no care or responsibility for what they've helped create in Cuba.

Still very sympathetic to the communist regime there, as I hate to say, as are many of the people in the leading positions of the Democratic Party. What do you make of this?

RUBIO: Well, you're right. I mean, people aren't aware of it.

You know, Fidel Castro was a liar from the beginning when he was in the Sierra Maestra as a guerilla. They covered him, they romanticized him. The gentleman you mentioned, romanticized him. He wrote a series of articles intended to influence American public opinion.

He said he was a Democrat. He said he was going to have elections and things -- he actually used to use religious symbolism to sort of make people think that he was, you know, a Christian-like figure and so forth. And then obviously, it all changed. He became an avowed Marxist and anti- American, almost started a nuclear holocaust with the Cuban missile crisis, and obviously has been a source of instability all over the world.

I mean, Cubans were involved in Angola, and in multiple countries in Africa. They have been involved in all the destabilization in the Western Hemisphere. They have committed horrific crimes, not just against their own people. They have killed civilian pilots, Brothers to the Rescue was shot down in 1996, unarmed civilian aircraft who were searching for rafters and trying to save them.

So, it's been a horrible thing, and you're right about the coverage.

I mean, even to this day, you get some ridiculous coverage about how great their healthcare system is, or how their literacy rate is so high and how evil the United States is, and how the embargo has imposed all this terrible pain on them. It is completely ignoring that the only embargo on Cuba is the one that regime has against its own people, of a private -- it's one of the key points of the Trump policy towards Cuba. If a private Cuban is allowed to open a business, we can trade and commerce with them. We just can't trade and commerce with entities owned by the Communist Party, the Marxist regime of Cuba, and that's the right policy.

LEVIN: What do you make of the support for this regime? I mean, 20 years ago, 30 years ago, I mean, the nation is almost unified in its objection to that regime. Certainly, in the 60s, the Democratic Party was absolutely appalled by that regime. I don't see the same sense of morality and concern. I see parts of the Democratic Party, the so-called squad, which are cheering for Castro the way they were cheering for Hamas, the way they cheer against the United States.

This is growing in this country. Don't you get that sense?

RUBIO: Well, it is certainly growing as a vibrant constituency inside the Democratic Party. I mean, if you look at who raises the money, who knocks on the doors, what's their activist base? It is unfortunately for the country, basically, Neo-Marxists you know, New Age Marxist, they don't call themselves that, but that's what they stand for who also happened to be whatever against America is for.

So, there's a problem in the world, some suffering somewhere, Cuba or anywhere else for that matter there is some U.S. policy causing that is something it. Something we've done wrong.

Because remember, at the core of one of their arguments that these Marxists make is that America is an inherently evil nation, funded by -- founded by inherently evil men, built on an inherently evil foundation. And therefore, this is not a nation we're saving, this as a nation that needs to be torn down and rebuilt alongside some other image that they have for the country.

So, I think there's a lot of that embedded in it. And then part of it is, look, if you're a socialist, if you're a Marxist, you look at Cuba, and you say, okay, we don't like the fact they put people in jail and beat up protesters. But generally, what they're trying to do over there is the right thing. You know, government sponsored this and government provided that.

I think for us, Cuba is an example of what Marxism always wants. Marxism wants to keep people poor. Socialism wants to keep people poor because poor people are easier to control. You can use food, you can use medicine, you can use jobs, and you can use education as leverage over them to get them to do what you want them to do.

And I think that's a powerful lesson to take away from Cuba, from Venezuela, Nicaragua, and anywhere else where Marxism and socialism reigns.

LEVIN: The President of the United States, Joe Biden was slow to respond. You had people rising up. They didn't have weapons. They were just marching in the streets.

They had speech, even though they don't have free speech. I mean, they were really putting their lives on the line, and they were not just mostly peaceful, they were a hundred percent peaceful. And the thugs, the secret police come out and brutalize them. They dragged people off, some of whom are still missing.

They shut down bloggers, they shut down journalists, and I hear almost nothing coming out of the executive branch, not just the White House, but almost nothing coming out of the executive branch.

What do you make of that?

RUBIO: Well, I think it is evidence of a couple things. First of all, it took Joe Biden 24 hours to even speak about it, and then, their initial message is about -- it sort of indicates what's happening, okay?

The people in charge of Cuba policy, which has not been a priority for Biden or the Western Hemisphere for that matter, but the people in charge of Cuba policy are people that have long history of advocating for more engagement with the regime. In fact, the people running Cuba policy in the National Security Council and at the State Department are people that were very involved in the Obama opening towards Cuba, which was a total disaster, as admitted by some of the people who drew it up, by the way.

So, I think that's the first thing because their initial reaction was, yes, they are protesting, but it's because they don't have vaccines, which by the way, the Cuban government won't allow in. It is because they are hungry, and because the embargo is not allowing them to prosper. They're just hitting tough economic times.

So this is the fault of the Trump sanctions and the fault of COVID. That was their initial reaction.

Then they pivoted to just sort of a condemnation of it, you know, generally speaking, and then Biden actually had a pretty good statement. Socialism is failed. Marxism is failed. The State of Cuba is a failed state. We want to provide more internet, we stand with the people.

But a couple of days later, they come out with a statement that what we're going to do in Cuba is we're going to figure out a way for relatives to send more money to their relatives on the island of Cuba, leaving out completely A, that that's not what the protesters are asking for; B, that the vast majority of people in Cuba or the overwhelming majority do not get money from anyone abroad; and C, that the reason why money can't go there is because the regime has set up some bank in Panama, which controls it.

You have to send it to that bank, they take 10 percent, they keep the dollars, and they convert those dollars into a worthless Cuban currency. They steal it, and Trump said, enough for that.

So, they leave all of that out. So, what I make of it is, the people in charge of Cuba policy in this administration, are not in favor of being tougher on the regime, and frankly, I think prefer to have stability in Cuba than liberty in Cuba.

LEVIN: When we come back, Senator Rubio, I want to ask you about our immigration system. Do we have two sets of immigration systems? One for everybody south of the border and one for the Cuban people? We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JON SCOTT, FOX NEWS CHANNEL ANCHOR: Welcome to "FOX News Live." I'm Jon Scott.

A battle between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy could come to a head on Tuesday. That's when the special Select Committee to investigate the attack on the U.S. Capitol holds its first meeting.

Today, Speaker Pelosi named a second Republican to the panel, Illinois Congressman Adam Kinzinger, who says he humbly accepts the assignment. McCarthy argues the G.O.P. will not take part in the probe since Pelosi refused to accept members he picked.

Pelosi vows the committee will quote, "Get to the truth."

Dozens of wildfires continue raging out west. Firefighters are getting a handle on the largest, Oregon's bootleg fire. It is 46 percent contained, but has scorched almost 409,000 acres of brush and timberland.

I'm Jon Scott, we take you back now to LIFE, LIBERTY & LEVIN.

LEVIN: Welcome back. Senator Marco Rubio, there is lot going on the southern border, and most of it is not good.

People are pouring into this country. They're not just from Central and South America. They're from all over the world. They're from the Middle East. A lot of bad actors are crossing that border -- drug cartel types, MS-13 types, kidnappers, coyotes, in addition to people who want freedom.

Little kids are being sent. There's some horrendous conditions down there. The President and the Vice President won't go there to look at what their policies are doing, and yet, they have announced, the Secretary of D.H.S., who I understand is of Cuban ancestry. He announced, "Don't come to the United States. We will send the Coast Guard out there. We'll send you back."

Now, these are shark-infested waters. I understand we don't want to flood the people coming into the United States, but they really do qualify for refugee status as opposed to people who come into the United States because they don't like their economy, there is crime in their cities and so forth. What do you make of this?

RUBIO: Well, a couple of things. First of all, I don't believe anyone in Cuba -- I don't suggest anyone in Cuba take to the sea, okay? It's not the right thing to do and I warn them not to do it, and we have to be aware that the regime in the past has used mass migration as a weapon. In 1994 and during Mariel, they used it against the United States as a weapon and that can't be tolerated.

But you saw the forceful statement from Mayorkas almost immediate. Where was that forceful statement when Joe Biden was running for President or when he became President? You know, by the time they finally got around to saying it, which is what Kamala Harris did, it had no credibility. It almost was a joke.

Because the reason why we are having a crisis at the southern border, look, it's true, these people in Central America live under very difficult conditions, have for a very long time, but these trafficking networks have gone into these countries and other places and told them, hey, there's a new President. He is going to be the opposite of Donald Trump in every way.

Some of the first things that Biden does when he takes over, no more funding for the border wall. You know, we're going to change policies if you arrive with children. These traffickers go back and tell people, hey, the laws have changed. There is a new President. You can now get into the United States, especially if you come with children.

And guess what? That's what people are doing.

They believe the laws have changed because the attitude has changed. It is disconcerting.

So, that's what we're seeing now. We are seeing a crush on the southern border that is a rotating catastrophe, it continues to escalate on a daily basis and it was all caused by the rhetoric of Biden during the campaign, and the actions he took in the first days of his administration.

They didn't say what they said to the Cubans in those first days, what they said is, no border wall and children and families will not be separated, you'll be allowed to stay while we process your claims. And in the meantime, we will release you into the population.

That is an incentive. We are incentivizing. They are inviting people to come here illegally.

LEVIN: It's also a disaster. You're talking about potentially two million people a year. That's the size of the City of Philadelphia. We can't handle, we can't assimilate localities, can't deal with the school systems, police forces, welfare systems. They are bringing people into the interior of the United States, not just on the border. They are dropping them off without telling governors and local communities what is going on?

What is going on, Senator? What is in the mind of Joe Biden and his administration? Why are they doing this because this is an affirmative step?

RUBIO: Yes. Again, listen, go back to the point I made at the first segment, and that is there's an element, there's a very vibrant, important part of the Democratic base that raises money for them, knocks on doors. It is their activist base both small dollar donor, some large dollar donor and the activists that go up who don't believe in borders at all.

I mean, their argument basically is, if you show up here, you should be able to come in. I mean, there are people on the road that argue that there should be no borders, that people have the right to migrate wherever they want.

No country in the world, not America, not China, no nation on the planet can absorb uncontrolled mass migration. You just can't do it. It's not possible.

And by the way, it is terrible for these people. We are luring these people into the hands of some of the worst human beings, these traffickers, one of the worst human beings on the planet. They rape the women, they abuse the children, and they abandoned the sick people on the route. They sell them off. They hold them hostage until they pay the fee for bringing them over.

It is a terrible situation entirely created by the incentives that the Biden administration put in place by their -- with words and by their actions.

LEVIN: And you know, Senator, we wring our hands about this, we try and talk to our fellow citizens about this. The media oppose our views, the Democratic Party oppose our views, and these groups who talk about are activists for this agenda. The bureaucracy opposes our views.

We are losing the argument over immigration. We are losing the argument over the border. We are losing the argument over citizenship. Unless we can take back the government, correct, that there's not a lot we can do about this?

RUBIO: Well, I would say, Mark, I'm a little bit more optimistic because I think if you talk to people on a regular basis, I'm talking about normal everyday people, not people that are glued to cable television all day or spend all day on Twitter, but actually go out and have jobs and are out there involved. I don't care how they're register to vote. They all think this is lunacy. That's a majority position in this country. What is happening on the southern border is lunacy.

And I think you're right. Look, if this was a Republican administration this was happening under, you would have bureaus, the major networks would actually establish bureaus on the border. You would have a live cam, 24 hours a day. You know, they would have a clock on the bottom of the chyron on the screen, talk about how many people came in today. They would -- just like what they did when the children were being held in these processing centers, okay.

There would be all full scale attention across the board. But now they barely want to talk about it, and when they do talk about it, it's to either A, criticize governors for sending, you know, local law enforcement to backup Texas; or B, to talk about how this is being exaggerated, and there really isn't a crisis.

It's unbelievable, but I think people see it for what it is. I really don't believe people are falling for it. But you know, the left is oblivious to it because everybody agrees with them in the media that they think they are somehow holding the majority position in this country. They're not. And I think elections will tell that story.

LEVIN: I hope so, and I agree with you. I think there's going to be a reckoning in 2022 with what's going on in the border, crime in this country, where this administration and their party is taking us. But it is amazing that we have to wait because I agree with you, the vast majority of people, they don't like what's taking place in the border. They are repulsed by it, but there's very little we can do about it until that time comes, and so it is very important to focus on these things.

Senator Rubio, I want to thank you very much. And by the way, good luck on your re-election, too. Take care of yourself.

RUBIO: Thank you, Mark. I appreciate it. Thank you very much.

LEVIN: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEVIN: Welcome back. Tom Homan, you're familiar with Tom. Great patriot, former Acting Director of I.C.E. He wrote a book called "Defend the Border and Save Lives."

Tom, you spent an entire career trying to protect this country, trying to enforce our sovereignty. You see, it's all crumbling and melting away as a result of policies in the last few months by this administration and the party of Joe Biden. What do you make of all this?

THOMAS HOMAN, FOX BUSINESS NETWORK CONTRIBUTOR: Well, personally, I'm disgusted because you're right, Mark, I spent almost 35 years. I started as a Border Patrol agent on that border. I worked my way up the chain, rung by rung.

I was the first Director of I.C.E. who actually came up through the ranks. So, I spent my whole career doing this. And I can tell you without any doubt in the world that President Trump gave us the most secure border I've seen in my entire career, almost 35 years. That is just a stone cold fact.

You know, regardless if you like the man or not, he did more to secure this border than any President I've worked for. And I started with Ronald Reagan who is a great President, but Donald Trump secured this border and illegal immigration was down between 60 to 80 percent depending on what month you looked at.

And now, it's all been destroyed within weeks by the Biden administration. And for the people to think that the Trump administration policies are cruel and inhumane, I will argue that I've worked for six different Presidents, the policies worked.

And let me ask this question to the American people who are listening, when illegal immigration is down 60 to 80 percent, how many women aren't being raped by the cartels? How many children aren't dying? How many millions of dollars do the cartel not make on smuggling drugs? How many fentanyl overdoses didn't occur?

So the fact is, President Trump saved lives. He secured the border.

Joe Biden ran on an open borders agenda. He sold himself out because he voted for the Secure Fence Act in 2006, the Secure Fence Act of 2006, he said yes. Border barriers work.

But to become President, he sold himself out to the progressive left and made all these entices about more toward no deportations, stopping the border wall, abolishing I.C.E., any I.C.E. detention, and free healthcare, amnesty, DACA. He made all these promises because he knew this would satisfy the progressive left.

So, I make no qualms in saying he sold out this country to win the presidency. And now we see inaction with open borders, and people say well, this isn't incompetence, this is mismanagement. No, it's not. Their plan is coming together perfectly. This is open borders.

What we see today is open borders, and it's disgusting because a lot of people think illegal immigration doesn't matter. Let me ask you this, does 93,000 fentanyl overdose matter since Biden became President? Because that fentanyl has come across that open border. Does 31 percent of women being raped matter? Does children drowning in a river matter?

Does 200,000 gotaways since he became President matter? Who are those 200,000? Are they drug dealers? Are they gang members? Are they traffickers? Are they terrorists?

Does the seven people that were arrested by Border Patrol that were on the FBI terror watch list, does that matter? And I get back to 200,000, how many of them were on the watch list that we don't know and where they're at, at this point?

LEVIN: You know, Tom, it is very odd. You hear them talk about the coronavirus. You hear them talk about the delta variant. You hear them talk about how they have to monitor and basically censor if they can, Big Tech platforms, how they want to go door to door to see if people are vaccinated.

And they go on and on about this, and we have a new pandemic of the unvaccinated. Tell me, Tom, why aren't they concerned about that about the people who are coming into the country? We don't have the medical facilities or the testing capabilities to know exactly who is coming in here and what kind of diseases they have? Particularly if they sneak through. You talk about 200,000 of them.

Why isn't it that Joe Biden and his administration and the whole medical and scientific staff that he parades out all the time show absolutely no concern about people coming in here who are dirt poor from foreign countries who clearly do not have the kind of medical care and vaccines and so forth that we have coming into this country and then moving them into the interior of the United States? They don't seem to give a damn about that.

HOMAN: No, they don't, and open -- they are open borders agenda, they are not going to risk that at all. And you're right, look, you can't name one thing -- and I dare anybody in any network to give me one thing this President has done to slow the flow. What has he done as far as pushing a task force deterrence to illegally entering the country, which is a crime by the way? He hasn't done anything. Why? Because every week, where I think they may come up with something to slow the flow, they offer another enticement.

The latest one was two weeks ago and he said, okay, we're going to open the aperture of who can claim asylum now. It is just not what the law says that you've got to be escaping fear and persecution from your home government, because of your race, religion, or political affiliation. Now, they are going to expand it to domestic violence. If you claim you've been a victim of domestic violence, you may qualify. If you claim you're in a high crime area, you may qualify. Gang violence, you may qualify.

They opened the aperture up and I'm just looking at it myself saying, what is that going to do? That's going to bring more people to the border illegally. And the President last night, I was watching him saying, he was bragging on how many people aren't in the custody of the Border Patrol and why they got there way down. You know why? Because they are releasing them quicker. They call that a success.

We process and release people quicker in the U.S. and that's a success. No. That's another enticement to people around the world watching out there, we can get released quickly in the United States.

As far as COVID, it is disgusting what they are doing with COVID, they're ignoring it. But I.C.E. has already had 7,500 COVID positive people through their detention facilities since this pandemic started. And right now, they've got over a thousand in custody between them and their contractors, a thousand positive COVID cases that came across the border.

LEVIN: Unbelievable. Well, Tom, you know, they are prosecuting a lot of people in Washington for trespassing on June 6. They didn't breach the Capitol Building, they're on the grass. They are being prosecuted. I doubt they are prosecuting anybody for trespassing just coming over the border and coming into this country.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEVIN: Welcome back. Tom Homan, Border Patrol agents, I.C.E., this is law enforcement. This is Federal law enforcement, and the Democratic Party doesn't like Federal law enforcement unless it is protecting them. Otherwise, they don't seem to give a damn.

Federal law enforcement on the border is there to protect the citizens of the United States. Nobody ever asked this question, so I'll ask you. What is life like for a Border Patrol agent or an I.C.E. agent today?

HOMAN: Well, like I said, I've wore both those uniforms. I was a Border Patrol agent, I was an I.C.E. agent for many years. I can tell you right now, I've talked to hundreds of them and their morale has never been worse.

Down on the border -- I've been at the border four times in the last two months, and these men and women, I'll tell you right now, they've lost total respect in the President of the United States, which is sad, and they have lost respect with the Secretary of Homeland Security. Why? Because the Secretary to this day will say the border is secure and closed and these men and women are dealing with this crisis every day putting themselves in harm's way and their Secretary won't recognize that.

And the second thing, the President during one of the first speeches accused the last administration of watching children starve to death on the riverbanks of Rio Grande. This is the men and women of the Border Patrol, the men and women who are putting their lives on the line every day, the men and women who saved over 7,000 lives already this year by pulling people out of the river, saving people in the desert.

These men and women save lives. Mr. President. They don't watch people starve to death on the riverbanks.

So, they've lost respect. They've been abandoned by their own Commander-in- Chief and their Secretary. That's what it's like.

And let me tell you something else. We were talking about COVID a few minutes ago, over 20 CBP officers have died from COVID. So, it's just not gunshots and high speed chases and fights. They've died from COVID from people coming across that border that have been infected. That's just -- and that's a fact.

As far as I.C.E., I spent over 20 years as an I.C.E. agent. I.C.E.'s morale is in the toilet because they can no longer do their job and uphold the oath they took. And one thing I want -- the Biden administration said okay, we only can arrest illegal aliens that are convicted of serious aggravated felonies. We need to prioritize what you do.

Let's be clear, in the last five or six years, 91 percent of everybody I.C.E. arrested was a convicted criminal or pending criminal charges. That's pretty good prioritization.

And for the President and the Secretary to say we've got to cut those even further because of lack of resources, let me throw this number at you. In FY12, I.C.E. arrested and removed 409,000 people. They are going to remove and arrest less than 100,000 this year. So, they're doing 25 percent of the work. Where is the lack of resources?

Let these men and women do their job. They protect American communities. They're not allowed to do that.

And here's the sad thing that I've never thought I would say in my lifetime, an I.C.E. agent, an immigration officer can no longer arrest somebody for simply being here illegally. That's not a priority anymore. Being in the country illegally is not illegal in the eyes of the Biden administration.

LEVIN: So effectively what you're saying, Tom Homan, is maybe they haven't defunded I.C.E. or defunded the Border Patrol, but the way they have conducted themselves, they effectively have done that through the back door.

So, we still have the Border Patrol. We still have I.C.E., but their hands are tied. The policies are outrageous. They are open border policies, that basically Federal law enforcement when it comes to the border, can't do its job. People are pouring over. We're being overwhelmed. And that's exactly what Joe Biden and Kamala Harris want, and that's exactly why they don't go down to McAllen, Texas and some of these other areas where it's really overwhelming, because they know what their policies are doing. They don't need to go see what their policies are doing. Do agree with me?

HOMAN: Absolutely. I mean they may not have abolished the agencies, but they have taken their authority away. There's no longer enforcement of our immigration laws on the border or in the interior.

LEVIN: And the Department of Justice, where I.N.S. we used to call it, used to be housed. They act like they don't have any power whatsoever. They have all kinds of power, that's Federal law enforcement. They have the power to prosecute or not to prosecute. And obviously, the Department of Justice and the Attorney General of the United States, well, they want nothing to do with this either.

So it is a complete failure of the Federal government. The border is supposed to be controlled by the Federal government. We have some patriotic and courageous governors who are trying to do anything they can to protect the border and protect their citizenry and indirectly protect the citizen of these other countries, while Joe Biden sits there, stands there, doesn't want to see, go to the border, really has ice water in his veins, and doesn't really seem to give a damn about what's going on.

But this was your life. You wake up, you watch this President speak. You must say to yourself, this guy is unbelievable. He doesn't even act like anything is going on in the border, does he?

HOMAN: I'll say it again. Under President Trump, we had the most secure border in my lifetime and now we have the most vulnerable border in my lifetime under President Biden.

LEVIN: I want to thank you in particular and all the men and women on the border, all the men and women in I.C.E. I want to thank them for everything they're doing, and I want to apologize on behalf of the American people for this absolutely useless administration that we have.

Thank you, Tom, and God bless you.

HOMAN: Thank you, sir.

LEVIN: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEVIN: Welcome back, America. The border, wide open. People pouring over into the United States coming from other countries. A country that's supposed to be white supremacist, the vast majority of the people coming into the country are not white. They're poor and they are minorities from cultures and societies that have failed. And yet we have this movement in America, the American Marxist movement that does not believe these folks should assimilate into our system, but we should assimilate into their system.

We have a LatCrit movement that teaches students and is involved in this administration, argues that the United States is an illegitimate country. And in fact, it was settled by white Protestants from Europe and the white Protestants from Europe or any white people in the United States, they are the illegal aliens and the borders should be open.

Now, this may sound crazy, and it is. But nonetheless, this has influenced the decision making in this administration as so many of these radical American Marxist organizations and concepts have.

Why is the border wide open? Because that's the ideology. Why else is the border wide open? They just proved what I've been saying now for many years, because they hope that all the people coming into the country will change the demographics and then what? The vast majority will be legalized, will become citizens and vote Democrat.

Now, how did they just prove it? Well, look at Cuba. Are our arms open for the Cubans? To refugees should they take to the ocean? People who will be tortured and killed and otherwise abused? Not just starving, not just crying. Oh, they've got that on the Cuban island.

No, a communist regime. They're told don't you dare go into those shark- infested waters or we will turn you back. South of the border, they are told, our arms are wide open, come on in.

That tells you everything you need to know.

I want to thank those of you out there who've purchased "American Marxism." And I hope many, many more will. We need to stand up and defend our country.

See you next time on LIFE, LIBERTY & LEVIN.

Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.