Last Week Tonight With John Oliver (2014) s12e20 Episode Script
Immigration Enforcement
Welcome to "Last Week Tonight".
I'm John Oliver. Thank you for
joining us. It has been a busy week.
Wildfires burned in California,
Major League Baseball got
its first female umpire,
and in D.C., this happened.
President Trump caught White House
reporters off guard today
when he took a walk on the roof.
Sir, why are you on the roof?
Mr. President,
what are you doing up there?
I mean, it's a fair question!
Though it also says a lot about
the chaos of this administration
that the president just
fully Snoopy-ed on national TV,
and we'll probably forget
about it by next week.
And the thing is,
it got even weirder.
What are you trying to build?
Missiles.
- Nuclear missiles.
- You're saying more missiles?
- Are you building missiles?
What?
That may actually be a perfect
encapsulation of Trump's presidency:
a bunch of people yelling,
"What the fuck are you doing!?"
while he does
a C- minus Hitler impression.
But we're gonna dive straight in
with our main story tonight,
which concerns immigration.
The thing that brought America the likes
of Gloria Estefan from Cuba,
Albert Einstein from Germany,
and Elon Musk from hell.
Specifically, we're going to talk
about immigration enforcement.
Over the last few months, you've
undoubtedly seen reports of armed,
masked police raiding areas
like farms, parks, and Home Depots.
And the White House's social media
has been cheering it on,
from posts like this meme
showing "DEI"
standing for "Deport Every Illegal",
to this shit.
Na na na na, na na na na,
hey hey hey, goodbye!
Look, we all know this,
but sometimes it is worth reiterating,
this White House is full of
the pettiest little bitches imaginable.
And while that video is obviously
disgusting, on the plus side,
I now know what song
I want played at Trump's funeral.
I know it'd be hard to get in,
but you can throw
a Bluetooth speaker pretty far.
And it's not just the White House,
others have been getting in
on the shitposting,
with perhaps
the most telling example
coming from
a regional Border Patrol office,
which posted this celebration
of its agents
in Southern California's
"Premier Sector".
Open fire!
Help us!
It's jammed!
Okay,
if I may quote an insufferable man
on a first Bumble date,
"Have you ever seen 'Star Wars'?"
Because that's, pretty famously,
the bad guy.
Imagine how morally
bankrupt you have to be
to watch the most famous villain
in cinematic history
murdering a bunch of people,
some of whom
are literally begging for help,
and think, "He is so us!"
But for all the administration's
talk of targeting dangerous criminals,
the reality is very different,
as this L.A. neighborhood found out.
An abandoned cart, the only sign
that Enrique the ice cream man
had been taken into custody.
Enrique had been selling ice cream
in the area for almost 20 years.
He was a part of community events,
and neighbors insist not a threat.
I just don't understand it,
like, go after a criminal,
don't go after the ice cream man.
Many can't believe how he was taken,
they say by unidentified men
in unmarked SUVs.
Doesn't seem legal to me at all.
I would think that you'd have
to have paperwork
and, you know,
I mean, it just seems crazy.
Yeah, it does! And why the fuck
are immigration agents
going after
ice cream sellers anyway?
In that video where brave hero
Darth Vader was fighting bad guys
like "meth," "fentanyl," "fake news"
and "cocaine",
I don't remember one of those
labels being "guy who sells popsicles".
But that woman saying,
"Hey, this doesn't feel legal",
raises a question that a lot of people
are asking right now.
So given that, tonight, let's talk
about immigration enforcement,
and try and answer a few things:
what the fuck
is happening right now,
who are the people in masks
grabbing our neighbors off the streets,
and what
are the actual rules here?
And let's start
with what's happening.
Because as we've discussed before,
immigration authorities
have been given pretty clear
marching orders by this fucking guy.
We are looking to set a goal
of a minimum of 3.000 arrests
for ICE every day.
We can't take the risk
of letting these Biden illegals
roam around freely so the next
American daughter can get raped,
the next American kid
can get murdered,
the next American family can get
splintered and torn apart
by people that came
to this country unchecked,
uncontrolled, unvetted,
uninvited by the American people.
Now, that absolute firehose
of xenophobic bullshit
would be hard to hear from anyone,
let alone Stephen Miller,
who looks like what would happen
if Caillou smoked two packs
a day for 1.000 years.
He looks like
a Funko Pop of Lex Luthor,
except his eyes are
somehow more lifeless.
Now, that "3.000 arrests a day" number
is part of the administration's goal
of deporting a million
immigrants in one year,
which, it's worth noting,
would be more than double
the previous record of 400.000
when Obama was president,
which was already very high.
But notably, they don't seem to be
getting near their target numbers.
They're apparently at just
over 280.000 deportations.
So, getting to a million in just
six months seems very unlikely.
And they have backed themselves
into this corner.
Because promising to deport a million
criminal migrants is one thing,
but once you're in charge, you then
have to find that many of them,
which is going to be hard,
if they don't exist in the numbers that
you're claiming, which they don't.
It's like promising to apprehend
10.000 Fred Dursts a day.
There just aren't
that many out there.
So you have to admit that your target
number was bullshit in the first place,
or you have to drastically widen your
definition of what a "Fred Durst" is
until you're eventually arresting
any Gen Xer wearing a hat.
But instead of conceding
their numbers were inflated,
the administration's trying
to drive up arrests at all costs.
Not only has Miller told ICE agents
to target Home Depots and 7-Elevens,
he's giving them
a lot of extra help.
ICE has rapidly "deputized
a record number of local police"
"to function as deportation agents."
They've pulled in Border Patrol as well,
as well as the National Guard,
at least 25% of the DEA,
up to 80% of the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, and Firearms,
and even members of
the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.
And this cross-agency collaboration
is why, at the start of a raid,
like this one
at a nightclub in Colorado,
you can see personnel wearing
gear with logos for the DEA, FBI,
postal inspectors, FBI again, ICE's
enforcement and removal operations
and the IRS.
And for what it's worth, I can't
imagine the postal inspectors love
getting thrown on the 3:00 AM shift,
nor can I imagine it's much fun
to turn up at the club and end
up getting arrested by the mail.
This reallocation of resources means
other crimes are going less policed.
At the FBI, for instance,
agents have been told
to scale up immigration enforcement
and deprioritize white-collar cases.
And even within ICE, their
homeland security investigations unit,
which usually focuses on major offenses
like cyber crime and drug trafficking,
has been redeployed onto lower- level
immigration cases.
One agent there has even complained,
"No drug cases, human trafficking,
child exploitation, it's infuriating."
For a guy who pandered so heavily
to people convinced pedophiles,
sex offenders, and traffickers
had infiltrated our government,
Trump's sure making the government
a lot friendlier to them.
Ghislaine Maxwell's
in a nicer cell now,
Lawrence Taylor's advising
Fuck it, at this point, if he's
willing to wear a MAGA hat,
I really don't see why Roman Polanski
can't come back.
Officials like border czar Tom Homan
insist that none of that matters,
because they're catching
a ton of hardened criminals.
For those we arrest, 70%,
approximately 70%
of those we arrest are criminals.
Who's the other 30%? The other
30% are national security threats.
Most national security threats
don't have a criminal history,
'cause they try to lay low until
it's time for them to do things bad.
Okay.
Speaking things bad aside,
Homan is getting
a lot wrong there.
Because under his logic,
I guess anyone can be
a national security threat.
Even, for instance,
your local ice cream man.
Sure, the worst thing he's ever done
was maybe give someone
one of those SpongeBob
popsicles a la Salvador Dali,
but don't be fooled.
According to this decaying corpse
of a baseball umpire,
he's probably just lying low 'til
it's time for him to "do things bad".
But also, Homan's numbers there
are nowhere near ICE's own data.
Because it turns out only around
40% of those arrested by ICE
had any criminal convictions,
which can include
things like traffic infractions,
and just 7% were convicted
of any sort of violent crime.
In fact, as of the end of June, people
with only civil immigration violations,
no criminal charges or convictions,
made up the largest percentage
of ICE arrests nationwide.
And maybe the clearest sign that
this is more about pushing up numbers
than catching violent criminals
on the run
is that one of the key places
they're now fishing for arrests
is immigration court, when
people show up for their hearings.
We captured the moment two men
went from migrants to detainees.
It happened last week
at Dallas immigration court
when nearly a dozen people showed
up to have their asylum cases heard.
Their cases
were dismissed by the judge.
And when they walked out
of the courtroom,
plainclothes federal agents were
waiting to take them into custody.
ICE is asking immigration judges
across the country
to dismiss the court cases
of certain migrants
so the agency can arrest
them once their hearings end,
and place them in a fast-track
deportation process
known as expedited removal.
Outside a Miami courthouse,
this migrant in cuffs says in Spanish,
"It's a trap."
That is all awful, very much including
the term "expedited removal",
which sounds less like a legal process
and more like a phrase you'd see
with an exclamation point
on the packaging
for a particularly powerful laxative.
And to be clear about
what is happening there,
generally, you can't be deported
if you have an active immigration case
pending in court.
If your case is dismissed, and you've
been here for less than two years,
the government can move to put you
through expedited removal,
meaning you can be deported
without any hearing at all.
So, administration attorneys are asking
for cases to be dismissed,
and immigration judges,
all of whom work for the DOJ,
have been told
to grant those requests.
It is the laziest possible way
to juice up your numbers,
because you're targeting people
who are going
through the system "the right way"
and turning them into people that you
can immediately arrest and deport.
Trump is also working to end programs
that give temporary legal protections
to certain immigrants from countries
like Afghanistan, Haiti and Venezuela,
and by September, it's estimated
these changes will cause
nearly a million people,
who've been vetted
and given permission to live
and work here,
to lose those protections and become
at risk for deportation.
But obviously, the most visible aspect
of this surge in enforcement
has been those raids
that you've seen on TV,
a term, by the way,
that Tom Homan does not care for.
I don't like the term "raid"
because when we go out,
there's a targeted
enforcement operation,
we know who we're looking for
and we have fugitive operations,
operational sheets at every arrest.
You'd say,
"Here's who I'm going to go arrest,"
"here's where I think I'll find him,
here's his immigration history,"
"here's his criminal history."
We're not going out on the streets
looking at people different than us.
We're targeted
enforcement operations.
Well, that's reassuring.
I'm glad that Homan's not just
arresting "people different from him",
because that'd be bad news
for anyone who doesn't sound
like John C. Reilly
being actively drowned.
Unfortunately, his claim there
that ICE is engaged
in "strictly targeted enforcement"
is at odds with internal emails
showing immigration officials
have been urged
to "turn the creative knob up to 11"
when it comes to enforcement,
and that "if it involves handcuffs on
wrists, it's probably worth pursuing."
Which in another context would
be very hot, but really isn't here.
One tactic suggested is interviewing
and potentially arresting
what are called "collaterals",
basically, people just encountered
while looking for someone else.
That is something this local station
witnessed firsthand
when it did a ride-along with ICE.
These ICE agents were looking
for an MS-13 gang member
but spotted this man
meeting up with a painting crew
on his way to a work site.
This guy's been eyeballing us
since he pulled up,
so I'm just trying to figure out
what's going on with him.
He was arrested, also without
a prior criminal record,
and now sits
in a holding facility in New Orleans.
Yeah,
that is absurd for many reasons,
including that "eyeballing" should
never be a pretext for arrest,
unless you're a tarsier,
the nocturnal Asian primate
that always looks like you just
caught it cheating on its wife.
There should probably be consequences
for eyeballing someone like that!
So clearly, enforcement
is nowhere near as targeted
as this administration likes to claim.
But the scary thing is,
it doesn't have to be.
And it's worth taking a minute to talk
about the rules governing these arrests,
which are a lot looser
than you might think.
When ICE sets out to arrest someone,
they don't need a criminal arrest
warrant, which are issued by judges.
They can just do it
with just an administrative warrant,
which can be signed off
on by an agency staffer.
Those don't entitle ICE
to go into someone's home,
but they don't have to tell you that.
Officers can also just stop
and question people on the street
and, as Homan will tell you, they
don't need much justification for that.
They just need the totality
of the circumstances, right?
They just got through
the observation,
get articulable facts based on
the location, the occupation,
their physical appearance,
their actions.
You know, agents are trained,
what they need to detain somebody
temporarily and question them
is not probable cause.
It's reasonable suspicion.
Okay, setting aside that stumbling
over the word "articulable"
is objectively very funny,
reasonable suspicion is a low bar.
I have reasonable suspicion
to believe Tom Homan
was doing that interview
on about 12 Tylenol PMs,
but that is different from me
having proof, isn't it?
I should note: the administration's
currently fighting a court's ban
on them stopping people based
solely on their ethnicity, language,
occupation, or presence
at a particular location.
And it's unclear
if it'll ultimately be allowed.
But other things that
the administration's doing
that sure feel like they're
breaking the law often aren't.
Take the dystopian visuals
of agents wearing masks.
It turns out, no federal law forbids
federal law enforcement personnel
from wearing masks.
So, they can do it.
But why are they?
Well, the administration claims
it's for their own protection,
arguing early last month that
there'd been a 690% increase
in assaults on agents
from the year before.
Which does sound alarming,
although, you should know first,
it turns out that meant there'd been
a total of 79 assaults at that point,
up from 10 the previous year.
But also, they seem to be applying
the word "assault" very loosely.
Here's Kristi Noem defining
what she sees as violence against
federal agents in extremely broad terms.
Violence is anything
that threatens them and their safety.
So, it is doxxing them.
It's videotaping them
where they're at when
they're out on operations,
encouraging other people to come
and to throw things, rocks, bottles,
we've seen Molotov
cocktails thrown at them.
That is quite an escalation, from
"videotaping" to "Molotov cocktail".
Those aren't remotely
the same thing.
I know that because one of those things
is happening to me right now.
And we've seen that standard
in action in June,
when New York City mayoral
candidate Brad Lander
locked arms with an immigrant
in a courthouse
as ICE agents tried to detain him,
he was arrested for impeding
and assaulting officers,
which sure
isn't what this looks like!
It looks more like something you see
in the chapter of a history book
titled "How It Started".
For what it's worth, ICE agents wearing
masks and not being identifiable
makes everyone less safe,
including them,
especially in states
with "stand your ground" laws.
One law professor pointed out,
"Somebody's gonna get shot or killed"
"and it may well be an officer."
And I'm hesitant
to even point that out,
since imagining a crime
against an ICE agent
currently seems to be enough
for this bird's nest of a human
to count it as one.
And it sure seems like all this,
from the drive to hit numbers
to the removal of safeguards,
is a perfect storm for trouble,
perhaps best encapsulated by
the sheer number of videos out there
of U.S. citizens being detained or
even arrested by federal agents.
Witnesses capturing a traffic stop
involving ICE and Border Patrol agents
on Brown Street
in Rochester, Tuesday.
What's your name?
My name is Jose Castro.
I'm a citizen here.
I said, "Brother, I'm American,
I'm American, I'm American."
He says the agent asked him what city
and hospital he was born in.
I said, "I don't know."
And because I didn't know,
he threw me to the gate,
and he twisted my arm.
This was the moment Border Patrol
and Florida Highway Patrol officers
detained a U.S. citizen while
conducting immigration enforcement.
- I got rights to talk, bro.
- You got no rights here.
- I do.
- You're an illegal, brother. Get up!
Okay, that is all obviously terrible,
and while this is by no means
the most important thing,
who the fuck even knows
what hospital they were born in?
I mean,
I do happen to know mine,
Her Majesty's Royal Cumberbunch
Hospital for Children & Pasty Adults,
but that's only 'cause I lived there
until I was 30.
But it's also pretty difficult
to hear Tom Homan say
people aren't targeted
based on their race
when you see an officer tell
an American citizen,
who happens to be a Spanish-speaking
guy on his way to a landscaping job,
say, "You got no rights here,
you're an illegal."
That feels like the most naked racism
you could possibly see on camera,
at least until Stephen Miller
starts an OnlyFans.
And if you want to see
this whole story in one place,
just look at this incident in L.A.
Are you serious, bro?
Job Garcia was capturing
an ICE raid on camera
when he suddenly became
the target as well.
The 37-year-old U.S. citizen
tackled and taken into custody.
You want to go to jail?
Fine. You got it.
He says he was first taken to a holding
area at Dodger Stadium,
where he heard the agents boasting
about how many people
they had grabbed.
Like, "How many bodies
did you guys get today?"
And one of them said 31.
And they started like, "Yay."
Like, "It was a good day today."
And they were high-fiving each other.
He says the officers also debated
about what they could charge him with.
At first it was assault
of a federal agent,
but only later the narrative started
switching, because the video was out.
Yeah, he's actually seeking
damages over that incident.
And I should say, we contacted DHS,
and they maintain
he "assaulted and verbally harassed
a Border Patrol agent",
only one of which is even a crime,
and neither of which
they've charged him with.
Also, while DHS ignored
most of our questions,
when we asked about that
Darth Vader video, they said,
"Not to spoil the plot,
but as any 'Star Wars' fan knows,"
"Darth Vader
is also Anakin Skywalker."
"I don't think DHS needs
to regale the American public"
"on the heroism of Skywalker,
they know."
Which is just an incredible,
deeply shitty response.
I'd love to know their disingenuous
takes on other movie villains.
"Actually, if you think about it,"
"Thanos was the real hero
of the 'Avengers' movies,"
"because as any Marvel fan knows,
Thanos used to be a baby,"
"and babies aren't evil!"
And all of this gets even more
worrying when you remember
that Trump's Big Beautiful Bill
contained a massive surge of funding
for immigration enforcement,
roughly 170 billion
over the next few years,
some of which is being set aside to fund
the hiring of 10.000 more ICE agents.
And for what it's worth,
massive rapid hiring sprees
never tend to work out well.
As we mentioned before, when
Border Patrol surged hiring under Bush,
they struggled to hit their numbers
and wound up hiring cartel members
and an actual serial killer.
And it's not a great sign
for who ICE is appealing to
that they're currently
posting gross recruitment ads
like this fake minivan ad tagged,
"Think about how many criminal illegal
aliens you could fit in this bad boy!"
And they seem more
than a little desperate already,
as they've removed age limits
for hiring agents, and this week,
they shared this video
starring their newest recruit.
Hey, everybody, Dean Cain here.
And for those who don't know,
I am a sworn law enforcement officer,
as well as being a filmmaker,
and I felt it was important
to join with our first responders
to help secure
the safety of all Americans,
not just talk about it.
So, I joined up.
You know,
there's an old saying in Hollywood:
if all you can get is Dean Cain,
you are fucked.
Now, I'm not saying
that ICE isn't finding people.
I'm just saying, when you are reduced
to pinning a badge
on the 59-year-old star
of "The Dog Who Saved Christmas",
"The Dog Who Saved
Christmas Vacation,",
"The Dog Who Saved the Holidays",
"The Dog Who Saved Halloween",
"The Dog Who Saved Easter"
and "The Dog Who Saved Summer",
maybe you are in trouble.
Although, on the plus side,
no need for that guy to wear a mask,
because the chances of anyone
recognizing him are fucking zero.
So, what can we do here?
Well, as powerless as this can feel,
as individuals,
there are still actions you can take.
Experts say, if you personally
witness an ICE arrest
and are able to safely record
the interaction, you should do so.
You've seen what a difference
that can make tonight.
For more guidance on how to do this,
and what to do with your recording,
go to this address.
If you are approached by immigration
enforcement while out in public,
whether or not you're a citizen,
attorneys told us the only
things you should say to them
are, "Am I free to leave?"
and "I want to speak to a lawyer."
That's it. You have the right
to remain silent.
And I recognize that,
in some cases,
you may be unable to help yourself
from saying,
"Didn't you used to be Superman?
I thought you died."
"I can't believe I'm meeting
a filmmaker." But that really is it.
For more specific information
about your rights,
which may be slightly different
depending on where you are,
you can visit this address.
And while I know this is all very
bleak, it's worth remembering
that supporting immigrants is actually
the majority stance in this country.
People witnessing the brutal reality
of these raids has had an impact.
Trump's approval on immigration
has dropped sharply in the last months,
with 55% now disapproving
of what he's doing.
Meanwhile, support for a pathway
to citizenship
for long-term undocumented
immigrants has climbed to nearly 80%.
Don't get me wrong, we are still
in a very grim moment.
But the right-wing narrative
is that most people are rabid
to punish anyone trying
to become new Americans.
But that is just not true,
nor are their bullshit claims
about who's being targeted
and arrested.
And I am not saying that everything
ICE is doing right now is illegal,
what I'm saying is a whole bunch
of it feels like it really should be,
and we need to change that
at our earliest opportunity.
Because the fact is,
despite this administration's claims,
the majority of people they are
sweeping up are not drug dealers,
human traffickers,
or violent criminals.
Instead, they're ice cream vendors,
immigrants who show up to hearings
and even U.S. citizens.
Although I will give immigration
enforcement agencies one thing:
the way they seem to view themselves
is sadly increasingly spot-on,
and that is violent, cruel,
and hiding behind a fucking mask.
And now, this.
And Now: Local News Teams
Make Everyone Uncomfortable
on National Underwear Day.
National Night Out tonight,
which we talked about.
National Underwear Day.
Parade around the house,
or if you're feeling confident,
post a pic on social media
in your underwear.
I didn't think
you were gonna go there.
So glad you didn't say,
"Don't go without."
- National Underwear Day.
- I wish somebody would have told me.
- You would have participated?
- You would've worn some.
TMI on a Tuesday.
- National Underwear Day.
- I'm celebrating.
Briefs.
Briefs, boxers, boxer briefs.
panties or something?
- Yeah, in the shape of a bikini.
- Thong, up your butt.
High-waisted, granny panties.
You know, tighties, whities,
those are the ones
they can mess
with your reproduction. For guys.
- 'Cause they're tight?
- Yeah.
That's why you're supposed
to wear the boxers.
Some people can't wear
the boxers because, you know.
- Anyway.
- No, I don't know.
I figured you wouldn't.
Yeah, I like the boxer briefs.
Those are very comfortable.
There you go.
Moving on. Finally tonight,
a quick word about Chuck Schumer,
whose time on Earth
seems to be represented
by how far down
his nose his glasses are.
Schumer is the leading Democrat
in the Senate, which isn't ideal,
given how weak his responses to the
Trump administration have been so far.
When it withheld hundreds of
millions of dollars from universities,
claiming it was
to "combat antisemitism,"
Schumer went on TV to proudly
announce Democrats' counterpunch.
So, we sent him a very strong
letter just the other day,
asking eight very strong questions
about why this isn't just a pretext.
You'll let us know if you get
a response to that letter.
Yeah. It's not ideal when you're
getting dunked on by a CNN anchor.
But I do love the way he said,
"We sent him a very strong letter"
as if that is literally anything.
He might as well have said,
"We had a gerbil fart in an envelope"
"and hand-delivered it
to Trump's childhood neighbor."
Either way, you are not
getting through to him.
But I actually want to talk less
about Chuck Schumer himself,
and more about two of his
favorite people, Joe and Eileen Bailey.
They're a couple that,
throughout Schumer's career,
he has talked about a lot.
They're a middle-class couple
in Massapequa,
which is a suburb on Long Island.
Joe and Eileen Bailey,
this middle-class couple,
they bought into
Reagan Republicanism in 1980.
Joe and Eileen are worried about
losing jobs or their friends' jobs.
The Baileys really don't believe
in trickle-down.
They don't believe in a whole lot
of government spending,
but they believe in tax breaks
for kids to go to college.
He's an insurance adjuster and
lives in the New York suburbs.
By New York standards,
he makes 50.000 a year.
If he lived in the middle of
the country, he'd make 40.
Wife works in a medical office.
She makes about 20.
She might make 15 elsewhere.
And, you know, I have guided
my political life through the Baileys.
Okay, first, Chuck, stop putting
all their business out there.
Joe makes 50.000 a year,
Eileen makes 20, they own two cars,
a Taurus and a Honda Odyssey,
and they have sex three times a week.
Joe usually initiates, but their
therapist is encouraging Eileen
to get more in touch with her
sensual side and surprise Joe
with some sexy lingerie when he gets
home from insurance adjusting,
which, again, pays him 50.000.
But you heard him, the Baileys have
"guided Chuck Schumer's political life."
Which is a little weird,
given they don't exist. Seriously.
He invented them. Schumer first
introduced the world to the Baileys
in his 2007 book
"Positively American:"
"Winning Back the Middle-Class
Majority One Family at a Time."
In it, he mentions the Baileys an
astonishing 265 times in 264 pages.
But he'd apparently been
talking about them
for years
before the book was published.
One of his former spokespeople said,
"He's always asking,
'What would the Baileys think?'"
And to be fair, Schumer acknowledges
that some may find this a little weird.
If you ask my staff,
I've been talking about
and talking to the Baileys for 15 years.
I have conversations with them.
One of my staffers once said I had
imaginary friends to the press,
got me in some trouble.
But these people are real,
and I respect them,
and I really love them
and I care about them.
Okay, sure, but they're literally
not real, Chuck.
You invented them.
And look, I'm not saying
that imagining a manifestation
of your target demo's wants and needs
is necessarily a bad thing.
I do it myself.
I have a made-up couple that
I consult when making this show,
Jerry and Patricia Globdooks
from New York City, Iowa.
Jerry's a dental hygienist
who makes 37 dollars a year,
and Patricia's a snake masseuse
who makes 60.000,
she might make 20 million elsewhere.
I love the Globdooks, and I fear them.
Occasionally, my staff say, "Should we
make the show fun this week"
"and not talk about something
incredibly sad or boring?"
But the Globdooks will shout,
"No, John!"
"You need to do a 25-minute deep dive
about corn!"
I say, "If that's what the Globdooks
want, let's give it to them."
But even if you can understand
the potential utility
of creating a prototypical voter in
your head, this goes way beyond that.
Because Schumer's given the Baileys
an unnecessarily detailed backstory.
For instance, he's said,
"Joe takes off his cap and sings
along with the national anthem"
"before the occasional
Islanders game." Okay!
And when their daughter Megan,
they've got kids by the way,
told Eileen a friend was caught
cheating on a quiz,
Eileen was appalled, because lying
is not tolerated in the house, ever.
Also, Eileen apparently helps
with the clothing drive at her church,
and "her father had a prostate
cancer scare a few years ago."
Again, this is a made-up family.
None of these people exist.
But wait, I'm still not done.
Apparently, "Joe Bailey
would never have a goatee",
"they watch 'Sex and the City'
and 'Desperate Housewives'",
"though Joe pretends
not to like either show",
"they think most baseball players
probably take steroids"
and if they were ever
to go out to a Chinese restaurant,
"they would
order kung pao chicken."
That's a J.R.R. Tolkien level
of gratuitous backstory,
and I don't say that lightly.
But the Baileys do seem to have a lot
of sway over Schumer's politics,
as he's brought them up
when discussing everything
from the 2008 financial crisis,
to cybersecurity,
which he framed as "protecting
the security the Baileys feel"
"when they go online
to buy birthday presents."
And to hear Schumer tell it,
the Baileys' views can be complicated.
The Baileys
are not anti-immigration,
but they are
anti-illegal immigration.
They really dislike the Enron
executives who stole money,
but they hate the people
who burn the flag even more.
They are pro-choice.
They understand that a fundamental
decision like that
should be made by the individual.
But they're glad their church isn't.
Really? Are you sure about that?
You know, I'm struggling
to picture someone saying,
"I'm definitely pro-choice,
but when I go to church"
"and hear my pastor say that abortion
is murder, it does make me happy."
And look, I'm not saying
that no one could think that.
But if you're claiming
the Baileys' views are those
of the typical middle-class voter,
you're taking a much bigger swing.
It'd be like arguing the average
American's number one priority
is replacing Lincoln
on the 5 dollar bill with Pikachu.
I'm not saying no one thinks that,
and having seen it,
I might even be one of them,
but let's not pretend
it's a mainstream belief.
And the more you hear
about the Baileys,
the more it feels like they represent
a particular slice of the electorate.
Schumer's said they supported the civil
rights, anti-Vietnam War movements,
because "they understood that morality
was on the side of the protesters."
But starting in the late '60s,
when those protesters cursed
the returning veterans
and Stokely Carmichael advocated
armed resistance
against the "white ruling class",
the Baileys were lost.
Which, fun fact, is both a misleading
history of the civil rights movement,
and what people who never
supported it tend to say.
And yet, Schumer will insist
the Baileys' concerns are widespread,
and that they could just as easily have
been the Ramirezes of Port Chester,
the Kims of Elk Grove, California,
or the Salims of Dearborn, Michigan.
But crucially, for all he talks about
how much he loves the Baileys,
they don't seem to return that love.
Because in 2021,
he explained how the Baileys had voted
in the past few presidential elections.
They voted for Clinton.
And then they voted for Bush.
They're not a member of one party
or another, they're independent.
- Did they vote for Donald Trump?
- Both of them did in 2016.
Joe Bailey still did in 2020
with misgivings. But she didn't.
Yeah!
The Baileys voted for Trump!
And just this March,
a reporter actually got an update
on their voting history.
You said the Baileys voted
for Trump in 2016.
They split Trump-Biden in 2020. I'm
wondering who they voted for in 2024.
Probably voted for Trump.
Probably voted for Trump.
But if you ask them why,
I think they'd say,
"Above all, crime."
Okay. So, to recap:
of the six votes the Baileys had
across the last three
presidential elections,
five went to Donald Trump,
most recently because of crime,
which, for what it's worth, was down
in every category last year,
with violent crime
at its lowest rate in 20 years.
They also think the civil rights
movement went too far,
and aren't against immigration,
just illegal immigration.
And this is the couple who,
in Chuck Schumer's own words,
have "guided his political life".
And at this point, it might be worth
asking: is that a good idea?
Because the truth is, Schumer's
devotion to his imaginary friends
may help explain why
he and the Democratic Party
have been so underwhelming
in recent years.
Because he seems to be focusing
a huge amount
on the interests of "the Baileys
from Long Island",
while forgetting other voters
actually exist.
And look, I'm not saying
that he shouldn't think about how
his messaging plays with suburban,
middle-class voters
with pretty right-of-center views,
or that they're not theoretically
winnable in the future.
What I am saying is, by tailoring
your policies so heavily to them,
you are pulling yourself to the right,
and in doing so,
you could be alienating
not only the rest of your base,
but new voters looking
for a party that speaks for them.
So, Senator Schumer, at least when
it comes to formulating policy,
it might be time to break up
with the Baileys.
Which really shouldn't be hard,
given that, politically,
it seems they've already
broken up with you.
And I know that you are not
going to listen to me.
After all, I'm not a fictional couple
from Long Island.
But luckily, we actually managed
to track down the Baileys,
and they have a special message
just for you.
- Hi, Chuck, I'm Joe Bailey.
- I'm Eileen Bailey.
And we're the Baileys.
We're your everyday middle-class
couple from Massapequa, Long Island.
I work in a medical office, and I make
about 20.000 dollars a year.
And I'm an insurance adjuster,
and I make about 50K a year.
Though if you lived in the middle
of the country, you'd make 40.
No kidding!
I don't know why 40
is such a funny thing to say.
We wanted to talk to you, Chuck,
because apparently,
you've spent your whole
political career thinking about us.
Which is a bit weird, and to be
honest, a little creepy.
You need to talk
to some other people,
because I know you think
you can win us over,
I mean, us specifically,
but I gotta tell you,
there's no way that's happening.
I voted for Trump in two
of the last three elections.
And I voted for Trump in all three.
Though I had "misgivings" in 2020.
The point is, Chuck, we're not
who you seem to think we are.
- We're Republicans, Chuck.
- Yeah, we're super-Republicans.
I think they're putting
litter boxes in schools.
Every time a celebrity dies,
I tweet, "Vaxxed?"
Want to hear a weird, crazy thing?
I get super, super mad
when store clerks don't say
"Merry Christmas", even in June.
I got banned from Chili's for screaming
at someone wearing a mask.
I take ivermectin
every day out of spite.
Here's a question, Chuck.
Where's my straight pride parade?
There's only two things
that we're afraid of:
rainbow fentanyl
and drag queen story hour.
And also the New York subway.
Obviously.
That's a terrifying place.
We both have 10 MyPillows each.
Yeah. Not to sleep on, though.
They're terrible.
But we do have a ton of 'em,
because we support free speech.
Also, let me just get this out there.
If you're putting your pronouns
in your email,
you should be scooped up
from your home,
you should be thrown in jail
and you should be never let out.
- Scooped.
- Just scooped up.
I stormed the Capitol.
I got this from Pelosi's office.
I'll hang this sign
right over my dick.
And then I just come in on that dick
and I slosh it around in my mouth,
and I slosh that dick around
some more.
- What else?
- What else, what else?
Our own kids don't even speak
to us, Chuck. You shouldn't either.
And we're not saying you never
have to think about us again.
But if you ever do,
try and keep in mind
that we are not the people
you were making us out to be.
Also, Chuck, we fuckin' hate
kung pao chicken.
We're actually, like,
pretty adventurous eaters.
I lean toward Cantonese dishes.
Talkin' 'bout some sweet and sour pork,
talkin' 'bout some rice,
dumplings with the tang sauce.
Right. I myself prefer szechuan.
Dan Dan noodles, twice-cooked pork.
The point is,
stop patronizing us, Chuck.
- We contain multitudes.
- Yeah. Most of which fuckin' suck.
So, go make your political decisions
by talking
to a broader range of people, Chuck.
- Free yourselves of the Baileys!
- We'll miss you, Chuck. Really will.
Yeah, but we'll always be here
for you, pal. I mean, not really.
We're fictional people, Chuck.
We're in your head,
you fuckin' weirdo.
Bye.
That really turned me on.
Do you want to get out of here?
- Big time.
- Fuck under that sign.
That's our show, thanks for watching.
We'll see you next week, good night!
- They're terrible!
- Awful pillows. They're so lumpy.
Did you ever pass out
in the garbage on the street?
- Just that one time.
- That's what it's like.
I always thought it was like
if you leave mashed potatoes out
for a couple of days.
And they're rock hard.
And then if you just put 'em
in a bunch of sheets.
- Just rock-hard mash.
- Rock-hard mash into old sheets.
- They feel like dead humans.
- Dead humans inside of pillow cases.
And we won't sleep on 'em!
- Scooped.
- Just scooped up.
Scooped!
I'm John Oliver. Thank you for
joining us. It has been a busy week.
Wildfires burned in California,
Major League Baseball got
its first female umpire,
and in D.C., this happened.
President Trump caught White House
reporters off guard today
when he took a walk on the roof.
Sir, why are you on the roof?
Mr. President,
what are you doing up there?
I mean, it's a fair question!
Though it also says a lot about
the chaos of this administration
that the president just
fully Snoopy-ed on national TV,
and we'll probably forget
about it by next week.
And the thing is,
it got even weirder.
What are you trying to build?
Missiles.
- Nuclear missiles.
- You're saying more missiles?
- Are you building missiles?
What?
That may actually be a perfect
encapsulation of Trump's presidency:
a bunch of people yelling,
"What the fuck are you doing!?"
while he does
a C- minus Hitler impression.
But we're gonna dive straight in
with our main story tonight,
which concerns immigration.
The thing that brought America the likes
of Gloria Estefan from Cuba,
Albert Einstein from Germany,
and Elon Musk from hell.
Specifically, we're going to talk
about immigration enforcement.
Over the last few months, you've
undoubtedly seen reports of armed,
masked police raiding areas
like farms, parks, and Home Depots.
And the White House's social media
has been cheering it on,
from posts like this meme
showing "DEI"
standing for "Deport Every Illegal",
to this shit.
Na na na na, na na na na,
hey hey hey, goodbye!
Look, we all know this,
but sometimes it is worth reiterating,
this White House is full of
the pettiest little bitches imaginable.
And while that video is obviously
disgusting, on the plus side,
I now know what song
I want played at Trump's funeral.
I know it'd be hard to get in,
but you can throw
a Bluetooth speaker pretty far.
And it's not just the White House,
others have been getting in
on the shitposting,
with perhaps
the most telling example
coming from
a regional Border Patrol office,
which posted this celebration
of its agents
in Southern California's
"Premier Sector".
Open fire!
Help us!
It's jammed!
Okay,
if I may quote an insufferable man
on a first Bumble date,
"Have you ever seen 'Star Wars'?"
Because that's, pretty famously,
the bad guy.
Imagine how morally
bankrupt you have to be
to watch the most famous villain
in cinematic history
murdering a bunch of people,
some of whom
are literally begging for help,
and think, "He is so us!"
But for all the administration's
talk of targeting dangerous criminals,
the reality is very different,
as this L.A. neighborhood found out.
An abandoned cart, the only sign
that Enrique the ice cream man
had been taken into custody.
Enrique had been selling ice cream
in the area for almost 20 years.
He was a part of community events,
and neighbors insist not a threat.
I just don't understand it,
like, go after a criminal,
don't go after the ice cream man.
Many can't believe how he was taken,
they say by unidentified men
in unmarked SUVs.
Doesn't seem legal to me at all.
I would think that you'd have
to have paperwork
and, you know,
I mean, it just seems crazy.
Yeah, it does! And why the fuck
are immigration agents
going after
ice cream sellers anyway?
In that video where brave hero
Darth Vader was fighting bad guys
like "meth," "fentanyl," "fake news"
and "cocaine",
I don't remember one of those
labels being "guy who sells popsicles".
But that woman saying,
"Hey, this doesn't feel legal",
raises a question that a lot of people
are asking right now.
So given that, tonight, let's talk
about immigration enforcement,
and try and answer a few things:
what the fuck
is happening right now,
who are the people in masks
grabbing our neighbors off the streets,
and what
are the actual rules here?
And let's start
with what's happening.
Because as we've discussed before,
immigration authorities
have been given pretty clear
marching orders by this fucking guy.
We are looking to set a goal
of a minimum of 3.000 arrests
for ICE every day.
We can't take the risk
of letting these Biden illegals
roam around freely so the next
American daughter can get raped,
the next American kid
can get murdered,
the next American family can get
splintered and torn apart
by people that came
to this country unchecked,
uncontrolled, unvetted,
uninvited by the American people.
Now, that absolute firehose
of xenophobic bullshit
would be hard to hear from anyone,
let alone Stephen Miller,
who looks like what would happen
if Caillou smoked two packs
a day for 1.000 years.
He looks like
a Funko Pop of Lex Luthor,
except his eyes are
somehow more lifeless.
Now, that "3.000 arrests a day" number
is part of the administration's goal
of deporting a million
immigrants in one year,
which, it's worth noting,
would be more than double
the previous record of 400.000
when Obama was president,
which was already very high.
But notably, they don't seem to be
getting near their target numbers.
They're apparently at just
over 280.000 deportations.
So, getting to a million in just
six months seems very unlikely.
And they have backed themselves
into this corner.
Because promising to deport a million
criminal migrants is one thing,
but once you're in charge, you then
have to find that many of them,
which is going to be hard,
if they don't exist in the numbers that
you're claiming, which they don't.
It's like promising to apprehend
10.000 Fred Dursts a day.
There just aren't
that many out there.
So you have to admit that your target
number was bullshit in the first place,
or you have to drastically widen your
definition of what a "Fred Durst" is
until you're eventually arresting
any Gen Xer wearing a hat.
But instead of conceding
their numbers were inflated,
the administration's trying
to drive up arrests at all costs.
Not only has Miller told ICE agents
to target Home Depots and 7-Elevens,
he's giving them
a lot of extra help.
ICE has rapidly "deputized
a record number of local police"
"to function as deportation agents."
They've pulled in Border Patrol as well,
as well as the National Guard,
at least 25% of the DEA,
up to 80% of the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, and Firearms,
and even members of
the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.
And this cross-agency collaboration
is why, at the start of a raid,
like this one
at a nightclub in Colorado,
you can see personnel wearing
gear with logos for the DEA, FBI,
postal inspectors, FBI again, ICE's
enforcement and removal operations
and the IRS.
And for what it's worth, I can't
imagine the postal inspectors love
getting thrown on the 3:00 AM shift,
nor can I imagine it's much fun
to turn up at the club and end
up getting arrested by the mail.
This reallocation of resources means
other crimes are going less policed.
At the FBI, for instance,
agents have been told
to scale up immigration enforcement
and deprioritize white-collar cases.
And even within ICE, their
homeland security investigations unit,
which usually focuses on major offenses
like cyber crime and drug trafficking,
has been redeployed onto lower- level
immigration cases.
One agent there has even complained,
"No drug cases, human trafficking,
child exploitation, it's infuriating."
For a guy who pandered so heavily
to people convinced pedophiles,
sex offenders, and traffickers
had infiltrated our government,
Trump's sure making the government
a lot friendlier to them.
Ghislaine Maxwell's
in a nicer cell now,
Lawrence Taylor's advising
Fuck it, at this point, if he's
willing to wear a MAGA hat,
I really don't see why Roman Polanski
can't come back.
Officials like border czar Tom Homan
insist that none of that matters,
because they're catching
a ton of hardened criminals.
For those we arrest, 70%,
approximately 70%
of those we arrest are criminals.
Who's the other 30%? The other
30% are national security threats.
Most national security threats
don't have a criminal history,
'cause they try to lay low until
it's time for them to do things bad.
Okay.
Speaking things bad aside,
Homan is getting
a lot wrong there.
Because under his logic,
I guess anyone can be
a national security threat.
Even, for instance,
your local ice cream man.
Sure, the worst thing he's ever done
was maybe give someone
one of those SpongeBob
popsicles a la Salvador Dali,
but don't be fooled.
According to this decaying corpse
of a baseball umpire,
he's probably just lying low 'til
it's time for him to "do things bad".
But also, Homan's numbers there
are nowhere near ICE's own data.
Because it turns out only around
40% of those arrested by ICE
had any criminal convictions,
which can include
things like traffic infractions,
and just 7% were convicted
of any sort of violent crime.
In fact, as of the end of June, people
with only civil immigration violations,
no criminal charges or convictions,
made up the largest percentage
of ICE arrests nationwide.
And maybe the clearest sign that
this is more about pushing up numbers
than catching violent criminals
on the run
is that one of the key places
they're now fishing for arrests
is immigration court, when
people show up for their hearings.
We captured the moment two men
went from migrants to detainees.
It happened last week
at Dallas immigration court
when nearly a dozen people showed
up to have their asylum cases heard.
Their cases
were dismissed by the judge.
And when they walked out
of the courtroom,
plainclothes federal agents were
waiting to take them into custody.
ICE is asking immigration judges
across the country
to dismiss the court cases
of certain migrants
so the agency can arrest
them once their hearings end,
and place them in a fast-track
deportation process
known as expedited removal.
Outside a Miami courthouse,
this migrant in cuffs says in Spanish,
"It's a trap."
That is all awful, very much including
the term "expedited removal",
which sounds less like a legal process
and more like a phrase you'd see
with an exclamation point
on the packaging
for a particularly powerful laxative.
And to be clear about
what is happening there,
generally, you can't be deported
if you have an active immigration case
pending in court.
If your case is dismissed, and you've
been here for less than two years,
the government can move to put you
through expedited removal,
meaning you can be deported
without any hearing at all.
So, administration attorneys are asking
for cases to be dismissed,
and immigration judges,
all of whom work for the DOJ,
have been told
to grant those requests.
It is the laziest possible way
to juice up your numbers,
because you're targeting people
who are going
through the system "the right way"
and turning them into people that you
can immediately arrest and deport.
Trump is also working to end programs
that give temporary legal protections
to certain immigrants from countries
like Afghanistan, Haiti and Venezuela,
and by September, it's estimated
these changes will cause
nearly a million people,
who've been vetted
and given permission to live
and work here,
to lose those protections and become
at risk for deportation.
But obviously, the most visible aspect
of this surge in enforcement
has been those raids
that you've seen on TV,
a term, by the way,
that Tom Homan does not care for.
I don't like the term "raid"
because when we go out,
there's a targeted
enforcement operation,
we know who we're looking for
and we have fugitive operations,
operational sheets at every arrest.
You'd say,
"Here's who I'm going to go arrest,"
"here's where I think I'll find him,
here's his immigration history,"
"here's his criminal history."
We're not going out on the streets
looking at people different than us.
We're targeted
enforcement operations.
Well, that's reassuring.
I'm glad that Homan's not just
arresting "people different from him",
because that'd be bad news
for anyone who doesn't sound
like John C. Reilly
being actively drowned.
Unfortunately, his claim there
that ICE is engaged
in "strictly targeted enforcement"
is at odds with internal emails
showing immigration officials
have been urged
to "turn the creative knob up to 11"
when it comes to enforcement,
and that "if it involves handcuffs on
wrists, it's probably worth pursuing."
Which in another context would
be very hot, but really isn't here.
One tactic suggested is interviewing
and potentially arresting
what are called "collaterals",
basically, people just encountered
while looking for someone else.
That is something this local station
witnessed firsthand
when it did a ride-along with ICE.
These ICE agents were looking
for an MS-13 gang member
but spotted this man
meeting up with a painting crew
on his way to a work site.
This guy's been eyeballing us
since he pulled up,
so I'm just trying to figure out
what's going on with him.
He was arrested, also without
a prior criminal record,
and now sits
in a holding facility in New Orleans.
Yeah,
that is absurd for many reasons,
including that "eyeballing" should
never be a pretext for arrest,
unless you're a tarsier,
the nocturnal Asian primate
that always looks like you just
caught it cheating on its wife.
There should probably be consequences
for eyeballing someone like that!
So clearly, enforcement
is nowhere near as targeted
as this administration likes to claim.
But the scary thing is,
it doesn't have to be.
And it's worth taking a minute to talk
about the rules governing these arrests,
which are a lot looser
than you might think.
When ICE sets out to arrest someone,
they don't need a criminal arrest
warrant, which are issued by judges.
They can just do it
with just an administrative warrant,
which can be signed off
on by an agency staffer.
Those don't entitle ICE
to go into someone's home,
but they don't have to tell you that.
Officers can also just stop
and question people on the street
and, as Homan will tell you, they
don't need much justification for that.
They just need the totality
of the circumstances, right?
They just got through
the observation,
get articulable facts based on
the location, the occupation,
their physical appearance,
their actions.
You know, agents are trained,
what they need to detain somebody
temporarily and question them
is not probable cause.
It's reasonable suspicion.
Okay, setting aside that stumbling
over the word "articulable"
is objectively very funny,
reasonable suspicion is a low bar.
I have reasonable suspicion
to believe Tom Homan
was doing that interview
on about 12 Tylenol PMs,
but that is different from me
having proof, isn't it?
I should note: the administration's
currently fighting a court's ban
on them stopping people based
solely on their ethnicity, language,
occupation, or presence
at a particular location.
And it's unclear
if it'll ultimately be allowed.
But other things that
the administration's doing
that sure feel like they're
breaking the law often aren't.
Take the dystopian visuals
of agents wearing masks.
It turns out, no federal law forbids
federal law enforcement personnel
from wearing masks.
So, they can do it.
But why are they?
Well, the administration claims
it's for their own protection,
arguing early last month that
there'd been a 690% increase
in assaults on agents
from the year before.
Which does sound alarming,
although, you should know first,
it turns out that meant there'd been
a total of 79 assaults at that point,
up from 10 the previous year.
But also, they seem to be applying
the word "assault" very loosely.
Here's Kristi Noem defining
what she sees as violence against
federal agents in extremely broad terms.
Violence is anything
that threatens them and their safety.
So, it is doxxing them.
It's videotaping them
where they're at when
they're out on operations,
encouraging other people to come
and to throw things, rocks, bottles,
we've seen Molotov
cocktails thrown at them.
That is quite an escalation, from
"videotaping" to "Molotov cocktail".
Those aren't remotely
the same thing.
I know that because one of those things
is happening to me right now.
And we've seen that standard
in action in June,
when New York City mayoral
candidate Brad Lander
locked arms with an immigrant
in a courthouse
as ICE agents tried to detain him,
he was arrested for impeding
and assaulting officers,
which sure
isn't what this looks like!
It looks more like something you see
in the chapter of a history book
titled "How It Started".
For what it's worth, ICE agents wearing
masks and not being identifiable
makes everyone less safe,
including them,
especially in states
with "stand your ground" laws.
One law professor pointed out,
"Somebody's gonna get shot or killed"
"and it may well be an officer."
And I'm hesitant
to even point that out,
since imagining a crime
against an ICE agent
currently seems to be enough
for this bird's nest of a human
to count it as one.
And it sure seems like all this,
from the drive to hit numbers
to the removal of safeguards,
is a perfect storm for trouble,
perhaps best encapsulated by
the sheer number of videos out there
of U.S. citizens being detained or
even arrested by federal agents.
Witnesses capturing a traffic stop
involving ICE and Border Patrol agents
on Brown Street
in Rochester, Tuesday.
What's your name?
My name is Jose Castro.
I'm a citizen here.
I said, "Brother, I'm American,
I'm American, I'm American."
He says the agent asked him what city
and hospital he was born in.
I said, "I don't know."
And because I didn't know,
he threw me to the gate,
and he twisted my arm.
This was the moment Border Patrol
and Florida Highway Patrol officers
detained a U.S. citizen while
conducting immigration enforcement.
- I got rights to talk, bro.
- You got no rights here.
- I do.
- You're an illegal, brother. Get up!
Okay, that is all obviously terrible,
and while this is by no means
the most important thing,
who the fuck even knows
what hospital they were born in?
I mean,
I do happen to know mine,
Her Majesty's Royal Cumberbunch
Hospital for Children & Pasty Adults,
but that's only 'cause I lived there
until I was 30.
But it's also pretty difficult
to hear Tom Homan say
people aren't targeted
based on their race
when you see an officer tell
an American citizen,
who happens to be a Spanish-speaking
guy on his way to a landscaping job,
say, "You got no rights here,
you're an illegal."
That feels like the most naked racism
you could possibly see on camera,
at least until Stephen Miller
starts an OnlyFans.
And if you want to see
this whole story in one place,
just look at this incident in L.A.
Are you serious, bro?
Job Garcia was capturing
an ICE raid on camera
when he suddenly became
the target as well.
The 37-year-old U.S. citizen
tackled and taken into custody.
You want to go to jail?
Fine. You got it.
He says he was first taken to a holding
area at Dodger Stadium,
where he heard the agents boasting
about how many people
they had grabbed.
Like, "How many bodies
did you guys get today?"
And one of them said 31.
And they started like, "Yay."
Like, "It was a good day today."
And they were high-fiving each other.
He says the officers also debated
about what they could charge him with.
At first it was assault
of a federal agent,
but only later the narrative started
switching, because the video was out.
Yeah, he's actually seeking
damages over that incident.
And I should say, we contacted DHS,
and they maintain
he "assaulted and verbally harassed
a Border Patrol agent",
only one of which is even a crime,
and neither of which
they've charged him with.
Also, while DHS ignored
most of our questions,
when we asked about that
Darth Vader video, they said,
"Not to spoil the plot,
but as any 'Star Wars' fan knows,"
"Darth Vader
is also Anakin Skywalker."
"I don't think DHS needs
to regale the American public"
"on the heroism of Skywalker,
they know."
Which is just an incredible,
deeply shitty response.
I'd love to know their disingenuous
takes on other movie villains.
"Actually, if you think about it,"
"Thanos was the real hero
of the 'Avengers' movies,"
"because as any Marvel fan knows,
Thanos used to be a baby,"
"and babies aren't evil!"
And all of this gets even more
worrying when you remember
that Trump's Big Beautiful Bill
contained a massive surge of funding
for immigration enforcement,
roughly 170 billion
over the next few years,
some of which is being set aside to fund
the hiring of 10.000 more ICE agents.
And for what it's worth,
massive rapid hiring sprees
never tend to work out well.
As we mentioned before, when
Border Patrol surged hiring under Bush,
they struggled to hit their numbers
and wound up hiring cartel members
and an actual serial killer.
And it's not a great sign
for who ICE is appealing to
that they're currently
posting gross recruitment ads
like this fake minivan ad tagged,
"Think about how many criminal illegal
aliens you could fit in this bad boy!"
And they seem more
than a little desperate already,
as they've removed age limits
for hiring agents, and this week,
they shared this video
starring their newest recruit.
Hey, everybody, Dean Cain here.
And for those who don't know,
I am a sworn law enforcement officer,
as well as being a filmmaker,
and I felt it was important
to join with our first responders
to help secure
the safety of all Americans,
not just talk about it.
So, I joined up.
You know,
there's an old saying in Hollywood:
if all you can get is Dean Cain,
you are fucked.
Now, I'm not saying
that ICE isn't finding people.
I'm just saying, when you are reduced
to pinning a badge
on the 59-year-old star
of "The Dog Who Saved Christmas",
"The Dog Who Saved
Christmas Vacation,",
"The Dog Who Saved the Holidays",
"The Dog Who Saved Halloween",
"The Dog Who Saved Easter"
and "The Dog Who Saved Summer",
maybe you are in trouble.
Although, on the plus side,
no need for that guy to wear a mask,
because the chances of anyone
recognizing him are fucking zero.
So, what can we do here?
Well, as powerless as this can feel,
as individuals,
there are still actions you can take.
Experts say, if you personally
witness an ICE arrest
and are able to safely record
the interaction, you should do so.
You've seen what a difference
that can make tonight.
For more guidance on how to do this,
and what to do with your recording,
go to this address.
If you are approached by immigration
enforcement while out in public,
whether or not you're a citizen,
attorneys told us the only
things you should say to them
are, "Am I free to leave?"
and "I want to speak to a lawyer."
That's it. You have the right
to remain silent.
And I recognize that,
in some cases,
you may be unable to help yourself
from saying,
"Didn't you used to be Superman?
I thought you died."
"I can't believe I'm meeting
a filmmaker." But that really is it.
For more specific information
about your rights,
which may be slightly different
depending on where you are,
you can visit this address.
And while I know this is all very
bleak, it's worth remembering
that supporting immigrants is actually
the majority stance in this country.
People witnessing the brutal reality
of these raids has had an impact.
Trump's approval on immigration
has dropped sharply in the last months,
with 55% now disapproving
of what he's doing.
Meanwhile, support for a pathway
to citizenship
for long-term undocumented
immigrants has climbed to nearly 80%.
Don't get me wrong, we are still
in a very grim moment.
But the right-wing narrative
is that most people are rabid
to punish anyone trying
to become new Americans.
But that is just not true,
nor are their bullshit claims
about who's being targeted
and arrested.
And I am not saying that everything
ICE is doing right now is illegal,
what I'm saying is a whole bunch
of it feels like it really should be,
and we need to change that
at our earliest opportunity.
Because the fact is,
despite this administration's claims,
the majority of people they are
sweeping up are not drug dealers,
human traffickers,
or violent criminals.
Instead, they're ice cream vendors,
immigrants who show up to hearings
and even U.S. citizens.
Although I will give immigration
enforcement agencies one thing:
the way they seem to view themselves
is sadly increasingly spot-on,
and that is violent, cruel,
and hiding behind a fucking mask.
And now, this.
And Now: Local News Teams
Make Everyone Uncomfortable
on National Underwear Day.
National Night Out tonight,
which we talked about.
National Underwear Day.
Parade around the house,
or if you're feeling confident,
post a pic on social media
in your underwear.
I didn't think
you were gonna go there.
So glad you didn't say,
"Don't go without."
- National Underwear Day.
- I wish somebody would have told me.
- You would have participated?
- You would've worn some.
TMI on a Tuesday.
- National Underwear Day.
- I'm celebrating.
Briefs.
Briefs, boxers, boxer briefs.
panties or something?
- Yeah, in the shape of a bikini.
- Thong, up your butt.
High-waisted, granny panties.
You know, tighties, whities,
those are the ones
they can mess
with your reproduction. For guys.
- 'Cause they're tight?
- Yeah.
That's why you're supposed
to wear the boxers.
Some people can't wear
the boxers because, you know.
- Anyway.
- No, I don't know.
I figured you wouldn't.
Yeah, I like the boxer briefs.
Those are very comfortable.
There you go.
Moving on. Finally tonight,
a quick word about Chuck Schumer,
whose time on Earth
seems to be represented
by how far down
his nose his glasses are.
Schumer is the leading Democrat
in the Senate, which isn't ideal,
given how weak his responses to the
Trump administration have been so far.
When it withheld hundreds of
millions of dollars from universities,
claiming it was
to "combat antisemitism,"
Schumer went on TV to proudly
announce Democrats' counterpunch.
So, we sent him a very strong
letter just the other day,
asking eight very strong questions
about why this isn't just a pretext.
You'll let us know if you get
a response to that letter.
Yeah. It's not ideal when you're
getting dunked on by a CNN anchor.
But I do love the way he said,
"We sent him a very strong letter"
as if that is literally anything.
He might as well have said,
"We had a gerbil fart in an envelope"
"and hand-delivered it
to Trump's childhood neighbor."
Either way, you are not
getting through to him.
But I actually want to talk less
about Chuck Schumer himself,
and more about two of his
favorite people, Joe and Eileen Bailey.
They're a couple that,
throughout Schumer's career,
he has talked about a lot.
They're a middle-class couple
in Massapequa,
which is a suburb on Long Island.
Joe and Eileen Bailey,
this middle-class couple,
they bought into
Reagan Republicanism in 1980.
Joe and Eileen are worried about
losing jobs or their friends' jobs.
The Baileys really don't believe
in trickle-down.
They don't believe in a whole lot
of government spending,
but they believe in tax breaks
for kids to go to college.
He's an insurance adjuster and
lives in the New York suburbs.
By New York standards,
he makes 50.000 a year.
If he lived in the middle of
the country, he'd make 40.
Wife works in a medical office.
She makes about 20.
She might make 15 elsewhere.
And, you know, I have guided
my political life through the Baileys.
Okay, first, Chuck, stop putting
all their business out there.
Joe makes 50.000 a year,
Eileen makes 20, they own two cars,
a Taurus and a Honda Odyssey,
and they have sex three times a week.
Joe usually initiates, but their
therapist is encouraging Eileen
to get more in touch with her
sensual side and surprise Joe
with some sexy lingerie when he gets
home from insurance adjusting,
which, again, pays him 50.000.
But you heard him, the Baileys have
"guided Chuck Schumer's political life."
Which is a little weird,
given they don't exist. Seriously.
He invented them. Schumer first
introduced the world to the Baileys
in his 2007 book
"Positively American:"
"Winning Back the Middle-Class
Majority One Family at a Time."
In it, he mentions the Baileys an
astonishing 265 times in 264 pages.
But he'd apparently been
talking about them
for years
before the book was published.
One of his former spokespeople said,
"He's always asking,
'What would the Baileys think?'"
And to be fair, Schumer acknowledges
that some may find this a little weird.
If you ask my staff,
I've been talking about
and talking to the Baileys for 15 years.
I have conversations with them.
One of my staffers once said I had
imaginary friends to the press,
got me in some trouble.
But these people are real,
and I respect them,
and I really love them
and I care about them.
Okay, sure, but they're literally
not real, Chuck.
You invented them.
And look, I'm not saying
that imagining a manifestation
of your target demo's wants and needs
is necessarily a bad thing.
I do it myself.
I have a made-up couple that
I consult when making this show,
Jerry and Patricia Globdooks
from New York City, Iowa.
Jerry's a dental hygienist
who makes 37 dollars a year,
and Patricia's a snake masseuse
who makes 60.000,
she might make 20 million elsewhere.
I love the Globdooks, and I fear them.
Occasionally, my staff say, "Should we
make the show fun this week"
"and not talk about something
incredibly sad or boring?"
But the Globdooks will shout,
"No, John!"
"You need to do a 25-minute deep dive
about corn!"
I say, "If that's what the Globdooks
want, let's give it to them."
But even if you can understand
the potential utility
of creating a prototypical voter in
your head, this goes way beyond that.
Because Schumer's given the Baileys
an unnecessarily detailed backstory.
For instance, he's said,
"Joe takes off his cap and sings
along with the national anthem"
"before the occasional
Islanders game." Okay!
And when their daughter Megan,
they've got kids by the way,
told Eileen a friend was caught
cheating on a quiz,
Eileen was appalled, because lying
is not tolerated in the house, ever.
Also, Eileen apparently helps
with the clothing drive at her church,
and "her father had a prostate
cancer scare a few years ago."
Again, this is a made-up family.
None of these people exist.
But wait, I'm still not done.
Apparently, "Joe Bailey
would never have a goatee",
"they watch 'Sex and the City'
and 'Desperate Housewives'",
"though Joe pretends
not to like either show",
"they think most baseball players
probably take steroids"
and if they were ever
to go out to a Chinese restaurant,
"they would
order kung pao chicken."
That's a J.R.R. Tolkien level
of gratuitous backstory,
and I don't say that lightly.
But the Baileys do seem to have a lot
of sway over Schumer's politics,
as he's brought them up
when discussing everything
from the 2008 financial crisis,
to cybersecurity,
which he framed as "protecting
the security the Baileys feel"
"when they go online
to buy birthday presents."
And to hear Schumer tell it,
the Baileys' views can be complicated.
The Baileys
are not anti-immigration,
but they are
anti-illegal immigration.
They really dislike the Enron
executives who stole money,
but they hate the people
who burn the flag even more.
They are pro-choice.
They understand that a fundamental
decision like that
should be made by the individual.
But they're glad their church isn't.
Really? Are you sure about that?
You know, I'm struggling
to picture someone saying,
"I'm definitely pro-choice,
but when I go to church"
"and hear my pastor say that abortion
is murder, it does make me happy."
And look, I'm not saying
that no one could think that.
But if you're claiming
the Baileys' views are those
of the typical middle-class voter,
you're taking a much bigger swing.
It'd be like arguing the average
American's number one priority
is replacing Lincoln
on the 5 dollar bill with Pikachu.
I'm not saying no one thinks that,
and having seen it,
I might even be one of them,
but let's not pretend
it's a mainstream belief.
And the more you hear
about the Baileys,
the more it feels like they represent
a particular slice of the electorate.
Schumer's said they supported the civil
rights, anti-Vietnam War movements,
because "they understood that morality
was on the side of the protesters."
But starting in the late '60s,
when those protesters cursed
the returning veterans
and Stokely Carmichael advocated
armed resistance
against the "white ruling class",
the Baileys were lost.
Which, fun fact, is both a misleading
history of the civil rights movement,
and what people who never
supported it tend to say.
And yet, Schumer will insist
the Baileys' concerns are widespread,
and that they could just as easily have
been the Ramirezes of Port Chester,
the Kims of Elk Grove, California,
or the Salims of Dearborn, Michigan.
But crucially, for all he talks about
how much he loves the Baileys,
they don't seem to return that love.
Because in 2021,
he explained how the Baileys had voted
in the past few presidential elections.
They voted for Clinton.
And then they voted for Bush.
They're not a member of one party
or another, they're independent.
- Did they vote for Donald Trump?
- Both of them did in 2016.
Joe Bailey still did in 2020
with misgivings. But she didn't.
Yeah!
The Baileys voted for Trump!
And just this March,
a reporter actually got an update
on their voting history.
You said the Baileys voted
for Trump in 2016.
They split Trump-Biden in 2020. I'm
wondering who they voted for in 2024.
Probably voted for Trump.
Probably voted for Trump.
But if you ask them why,
I think they'd say,
"Above all, crime."
Okay. So, to recap:
of the six votes the Baileys had
across the last three
presidential elections,
five went to Donald Trump,
most recently because of crime,
which, for what it's worth, was down
in every category last year,
with violent crime
at its lowest rate in 20 years.
They also think the civil rights
movement went too far,
and aren't against immigration,
just illegal immigration.
And this is the couple who,
in Chuck Schumer's own words,
have "guided his political life".
And at this point, it might be worth
asking: is that a good idea?
Because the truth is, Schumer's
devotion to his imaginary friends
may help explain why
he and the Democratic Party
have been so underwhelming
in recent years.
Because he seems to be focusing
a huge amount
on the interests of "the Baileys
from Long Island",
while forgetting other voters
actually exist.
And look, I'm not saying
that he shouldn't think about how
his messaging plays with suburban,
middle-class voters
with pretty right-of-center views,
or that they're not theoretically
winnable in the future.
What I am saying is, by tailoring
your policies so heavily to them,
you are pulling yourself to the right,
and in doing so,
you could be alienating
not only the rest of your base,
but new voters looking
for a party that speaks for them.
So, Senator Schumer, at least when
it comes to formulating policy,
it might be time to break up
with the Baileys.
Which really shouldn't be hard,
given that, politically,
it seems they've already
broken up with you.
And I know that you are not
going to listen to me.
After all, I'm not a fictional couple
from Long Island.
But luckily, we actually managed
to track down the Baileys,
and they have a special message
just for you.
- Hi, Chuck, I'm Joe Bailey.
- I'm Eileen Bailey.
And we're the Baileys.
We're your everyday middle-class
couple from Massapequa, Long Island.
I work in a medical office, and I make
about 20.000 dollars a year.
And I'm an insurance adjuster,
and I make about 50K a year.
Though if you lived in the middle
of the country, you'd make 40.
No kidding!
I don't know why 40
is such a funny thing to say.
We wanted to talk to you, Chuck,
because apparently,
you've spent your whole
political career thinking about us.
Which is a bit weird, and to be
honest, a little creepy.
You need to talk
to some other people,
because I know you think
you can win us over,
I mean, us specifically,
but I gotta tell you,
there's no way that's happening.
I voted for Trump in two
of the last three elections.
And I voted for Trump in all three.
Though I had "misgivings" in 2020.
The point is, Chuck, we're not
who you seem to think we are.
- We're Republicans, Chuck.
- Yeah, we're super-Republicans.
I think they're putting
litter boxes in schools.
Every time a celebrity dies,
I tweet, "Vaxxed?"
Want to hear a weird, crazy thing?
I get super, super mad
when store clerks don't say
"Merry Christmas", even in June.
I got banned from Chili's for screaming
at someone wearing a mask.
I take ivermectin
every day out of spite.
Here's a question, Chuck.
Where's my straight pride parade?
There's only two things
that we're afraid of:
rainbow fentanyl
and drag queen story hour.
And also the New York subway.
Obviously.
That's a terrifying place.
We both have 10 MyPillows each.
Yeah. Not to sleep on, though.
They're terrible.
But we do have a ton of 'em,
because we support free speech.
Also, let me just get this out there.
If you're putting your pronouns
in your email,
you should be scooped up
from your home,
you should be thrown in jail
and you should be never let out.
- Scooped.
- Just scooped up.
I stormed the Capitol.
I got this from Pelosi's office.
I'll hang this sign
right over my dick.
And then I just come in on that dick
and I slosh it around in my mouth,
and I slosh that dick around
some more.
- What else?
- What else, what else?
Our own kids don't even speak
to us, Chuck. You shouldn't either.
And we're not saying you never
have to think about us again.
But if you ever do,
try and keep in mind
that we are not the people
you were making us out to be.
Also, Chuck, we fuckin' hate
kung pao chicken.
We're actually, like,
pretty adventurous eaters.
I lean toward Cantonese dishes.
Talkin' 'bout some sweet and sour pork,
talkin' 'bout some rice,
dumplings with the tang sauce.
Right. I myself prefer szechuan.
Dan Dan noodles, twice-cooked pork.
The point is,
stop patronizing us, Chuck.
- We contain multitudes.
- Yeah. Most of which fuckin' suck.
So, go make your political decisions
by talking
to a broader range of people, Chuck.
- Free yourselves of the Baileys!
- We'll miss you, Chuck. Really will.
Yeah, but we'll always be here
for you, pal. I mean, not really.
We're fictional people, Chuck.
We're in your head,
you fuckin' weirdo.
Bye.
That really turned me on.
Do you want to get out of here?
- Big time.
- Fuck under that sign.
That's our show, thanks for watching.
We'll see you next week, good night!
- They're terrible!
- Awful pillows. They're so lumpy.
Did you ever pass out
in the garbage on the street?
- Just that one time.
- That's what it's like.
I always thought it was like
if you leave mashed potatoes out
for a couple of days.
And they're rock hard.
And then if you just put 'em
in a bunch of sheets.
- Just rock-hard mash.
- Rock-hard mash into old sheets.
- They feel like dead humans.
- Dead humans inside of pillow cases.
And we won't sleep on 'em!
- Scooped.
- Just scooped up.
Scooped!