vice president. our immigration advocates in this case have been saying remain in mexico photo forces would be asylum-seekers who want to come here but can t afford it from doing so to seek dangerous illegal ways of crossing the border. governor abbott has basically said, remain in mexico is a deterrent policy. any deterrent policy we can put in place at the border right now is a good helpful thing for the border patrol. what do you think? if governor abbott is 100% right. the problem right now is still that 42 has implemented implemented on a small number. as much as it has been helpful, people need to understand it is still a small number. it is being implemented on. that is where we are getting so many individuals that are still crossing into the united states. we heard henry cuellar say earlier, it s a small percentage that will get the asylum. as a small percentage that
0 land, air, sea, cyber, and space. we have reaffirmed that our article commitment is sacred. an attack on one is an attack on all and we will defend every inch of nato territory, every inch of nato territory. for our part, the united states is doing exactly what i said we would do if putin invaded. enhanced our force posture in europe. we will station warships in spain. we are stationing more air defense in italy and germany. or after 35 s in the united kingdom. added to strengthen our flag, new permanent headquarters for the army fifth corps in poland. in addition, an additional brigade combat team positioned in romania. an additional rotational deployment in the baltic countries. things are changing. we will adapt to the world as we have it today. although this is against the backdrop of our response to nato s russia s aggression and to help ukraine defend itself. united states is rallying the world to stand with ukraine. allies and partners around the globe are making significant c
translation: a based on experience, we see that only a translation: a based on experience, we see that only a deterrent translation: a based on experience, we see that only a deterrent policy - we see that only a deterrent policy can stop we see that only a deterrent policy can stop russian aggression and based can stop russian aggression and based on can stop russian aggression and based on history we see that a policy based on history we see that a policy of based on history we see that a policy of appeasement only encourages the enemy to do something. translation: again i would like to thank ou translation: again i would like to thank you very translation: again i would like to thank you very much translation: again i would like to thank you very much for translation: again i would like to thank you very much for your - thank you very much for your decision thank you very much for your decision and we welcome the troops from the decision and we welcome the troop
affirmative that they would give coverage, health care coverage to people who came here illegally. and the democrats no question are pushing, prioritizing immigrant rights in a way that is out of step with the mainstream of the country. the mainstream of the country does not want government-funded child abuse which is what is happening at the hands of the government in these private detention facilities where we re spending $775 per day per kid for them to have no toothpaste, no soap, not enough water. and sometimes no bed. and so this is a policy, it was intentionally put in place by the trump administration to deter crossings. it has failed. we have an increase in crossings. i think 60% more children are coming here this year. so this is a disagreement that president trump is using to appeal to the middle, but his deterrent policy is not going to change before he s elected. warren, what do you think? should border crossings be decriminalize snds.
of $8.6 billion for a wall, that s a six times the investment based on what the president got this year on a deterrent policy that we know doesn t work and deterrence got us to the man made family separation crisis that the trump administration put into place. we know 2800 kids who were separated officially during the zero tolerance period, but hhs pointed out how there might be thousands more children who were separated before the trump administration started that deterrent policy officially when jeff sessions announced it and now it turns out dana from the southern district of california and the judge down here has said that the trump administration must add those thousands of children to this list of the overall separated numbers. that could bring the numbers up to 3,000, 4,000, 5,000, 6,000 and we don t know because we don t have the accounting from the government as to how many children were separated in advance of the policy.