we ve been doing for three years, enforcing the human smuggli smuggling law, the employment laws. 40,000 people we have arrested, detained, investigated and are in our jails. i would like to see this law go through but we re still going to do what we have been doing. why would you prefer to hold them in your jails as opposed to handing them over to federal immigration authorities? because under current law you can just turn the illegals over to federal immigration authorities and therefore not incur the expense of putting them in jails, right? which the new law would require. i don t care about expense. i have tents, very cheap to put them in tents if they re convicted. but you know, when we stop someone and there s a violation of the law, regardless, if there s a criminal violation, they re here illegally, they re going to be booked into our jail instead of turning them over to i.c.e. that s the way we operate and what s the disadvantage of turning them over to i.c.e.? what do
lower expectations reminding the mediaone meeting will not end years of tension. his lead attorney rudy giuliani gave a speech in which he said after the president wrote a letter canceling the summit kim jong un got back on his hands and knees and begged for the meeting. top official stress giuliani was not speaking for the administration and foreign policy. the pres. tried to be diplomatic in the rose garden as he declared he had high hopes of kim visiting the white house, may be even more a law go and he will walk away if kim does not denuclearize. we have the potential to do something incredible for the world. i m totally prepared to walk. it could happen. maybe it won t be necessary. i hope it won t be necessary to walk. reporter: they may sign an agreement to end the korean war decades later and would like to see normalized relations between the us and north korea. boris johnson, the foreign secretary in the uk is saying there was a leaked audiotape of
cry for the midterm legislations. the american people will be heard, and we ll repeal and replace. i have pledged as my first act of legislation to put in a repeal obama care law. reporter: if republicans win a majority of seats in congress, one of the first seats they promise to do is repeal president obama s signature achievement. health care reform. what s your response to that? reporter: under a new gop-controlled house, texas congressman joe barton would likely become the key chairman overseeing health care. he said it would begin as soon as january to dismantle the law. if given the opportunity, we are going to try to repeal it. with something that makes sense. right away? well, the sooner the better. reporter: that threat comes when new portions of the law go in effect this week. that includes dropping policies for people who get sick. big expansion of coverage don t
part she struck out so far, when we come across an illegal immigrant, i was hoping that we could arrest that person under that misdemeanor law in lieu of turning them over to i.c.e. right now we ll keep turning them over to i.c.e. we will do our duties, doing our enforcement. if we come across any illegal aliens, we re going to do what we ve been doing three years, enforcing the human smuggling law, the employer sanction law. those are both state laws. we ve been doing it. 40,000 people, we have arrested, detained or investigated in our jails. i would like to have seen this law go through but we re still going to do what we have been doing. why would you prefer to hold them in your jails as opposed to just turning them over to federal immigration authorities? because under current law, you can just turn the illegals over to federal immigration authorities and, therefore, not incur the expense of putting them in jails, right, which the new law would require. i don t care about expen
we ve been doing for four years, enforcing the human smuggling laws. 40,000 people we have arrested, detained, investigated and are in our jails. i would like to see this law go through but we re still going to do what we ve been doing. why would you prefer to hold them in your jail as opposed to handing them over to federal immigration authorities? under current law you can turn them over to federal authorities and not incur the expense of putting them in jails, right, which the new law would require. i don t care about expense. i have tents, very cheap to put them in tents if they re convicted. we stop someone, there s a violation of the law, regardless of if there s a criminal violation, they re here illegally, they ll be booked into our jail instead of turning them over to i.c.e. that s the way we operate. what s the disadvantage of turning them over to i.c.e.? what does i.c.e. not do that you do? they violated a law. they should go to jail and do their time if convicted an