From your plans are micro about this is that it today. The secretaries of homeland Security was forced out of her job, even after carrying out and defend president trumps, most restrictive immigration policies, White Van

enough. It's Tuesday people might given describe what happened over the weekend so on Sunday, Kirsten Nielsen who's. The secretary at the Department of Homeland Security issues, the nations highest ranking immigration officer. She goes to the White House for an unscheduled meeting with President Tromp. Caitlin Dickerson covers immigration for the times and he in recent weeks has been very riled out publicly over an increasing number of people crossing the border

actually families who seek asylum, who have legal protections that mean they have to be allowed into the country. So the secretary arrives at her meeting with a list of ideas for how to address this problem, and she thinks she and the President are gonna, come up with a way forward, but instead, a few hours later, the president's sends a tweet announcing that she will be leaving her drawn breaking news here on finance from the White House of a secretary of When security Kirsten Nielson has resigned present frauds, maybe announcement the twitter tweaked, the president said quote: Secretary of Homeland Security, Kirsten Nielson will be leaving her position and I would like to thank her for her service. So it appears that the positive swinging the revolving door. Yet again, trying to install new people and his administration to carry out his bidding that sounds like a meeting that went very poorly racket sector Clearly, they were not able to come up with a solution that both could agree on

And by treating her resignation, I think, but were politely suggesting is it he fired fired her? Yes exactly so. What is the history between President Trump and Secretary Nielsen? So Secretary Nielsen takes her job at the end of two thousand, seventeen she's replacing her former boss, John Kelly, who went to be President trumps chief of staff? and she takes on this role as basically the person who has to approve any new policy. That's gonna be introduced along the order and its at this period of time, when I think the president is settling into his role, he's fired up about really coming up with some hot

evidence that he can point to ahead of the mid term elections, for example, and say: look look, I'm I'm keeping my campaign promises and I'm lowering immigration really dramatically so right away, she's, faced with aggressive ideas for how to prevent people from coming to the United States and the first one, family separation, and what do we know about? How Nielsen responds to that very controversial policy when it is first introduced her she slow off We reported in December of two thousand seventeen that a family separation policy had reached her desk for that final signature, and it took her four months to approve at during which time she and President Trump clashed quite a bit me. She had questions about the legality of it. She had questions about the practicality and how the public was going to

spot, and she had just a lot of reservations about moving forward. But ultimately she agreed and the policy was introduced in a formal way in April, separating the job Mr President, I don't believe in it. This is not America. This is not our country. This is not what we should be doing. this administration did not create a policy of separating families at the border. Shame on everybody separate children and allows them to stay at the other side of the border fearing deck and allow the secretary to come here and lie. Calling me a liar fighting words and not a liar. We ve never had a policy

Family separation and, let's be clear: if an American were to commit a crime anywhere in the United States, they would go to jail and they would be separated from their family. This is not a controversial idea, internally she's, if not resisting she said my questioning and slowing down a lot of these policies and then externally, for the public she's happy to defend them and really look like the face of them, and that ends up being something that she does actually over. And over again in her job and remind us what ends up happening to the family separation policy. So president trumps stopped the practice

self by signing an executive order, I consider to be very important. Executive order is about keeping families together, but it didn't matter because, a few days later, a federal judge intervene deem the practice unconstitutional and he didn't stop there. He said that families who have been separated as a result of the Trump administration, zero tolerance policy be reunited within thirty days. The orders is kids under five must be back with their parents within fourteen days from now some sort of a resounding disavowal of this policy by the legal system? Exactly as so, even though she pushed back again State Secretary Nielsen ends up taking the blame so what's another example of something that she expresses internal qualms about, but then goes out indifference publicly. So one of the next policies to be introduced was an idea to limit asylum pretty significantly so that people could only apply if they showed up at a legal port of entry, whereas beforehand

People could and did very often show up anywhere along the border present themselves to a border agency asked for protection and they were ushered into this legal process. The idea was to say you can't do that anymore. You have to show up at a specific office which is, of course, a pretty tal murder for somebody who's coming from Central America with you know, maybe a cell phone, maybe not not a whole lot of resources. They don't always know exactly where these offices exists. You do not need to break the law of this country by ensuring illegally to claim asylum if you are seeking asylum go to a port of entry, but, as Nielsen pointed out to the president, it was very hard to justify, because immigration law explicitly says that you can Request asylum, regardless of where you enter so again, Nielson is saying inside the White House: hey this not be legal. I have resumed and about it, but it. Nevertheless,

its implemented and, as you ve said, she's the decider. So she sign off on it exactly and it's important to point out that, when Nielsen pushed back against president trumpet in a reflection of her being a liberal on immigration or having a more sympathetic view towards asylum seekers. She just happened to be the face of an entire agency full of people who work in immigration enforcement, but who still made clear to her that there were going to be legal and logistical road boxes into putting these ideas into place and what happens to that ports of entry policy that would limit the number of locations that people can apply for asylum very quickly after its blocked by federal courts, and it remains that way. A district court ruled that the ban conflicts with immigration law said this was the executive branch trying tools very clearly

contradicts laws that were approved by the legislator. Branch and other Supreme Court has refused to step in to unblock the ban. Citizens were legal reservations are well founded. Another with her advice to the president is correct, even if its ignored that's right. Her analysis is sound because each time she's push back, she's been right and these ideas have been blocked. Do any of these policies. There were describing family separation limiting the locations at which people can seek asylum. Do any of them succeed in curbing the flow of, migrants, even for the very short period of time that there are in place before they are legally challenge. They down new number show a for honey percent of four zero zero. That is four hundred percent increase over just last year last October, we saw a record number of famine,

We seek asylum in the United States. This is after family separation is introduced and every month since then the numbers have gotten even higher. She, BP official, say border patrol agents or on page four apprehensions and encounters with more than a hundred thousand migrants in March which do not allow it. Policies being blocked in court for the british rebate of time that they were ever in place. There not do their job of limiting the flow of migrants. They're, not the numbers keep going up, and some people would argue that maybe the policies weren't left in place for long enough to show any concrete outcome. And we can't know that for sure, but what we do know is that these policies, that Nielson was pushing back on

They're, not gonna, work didn't work and the numbers of continued rise is awarded a due to the presence relationship to Nielsen cheese events being vindicated, but the problem she's there to solve is only getting worse, tissues simultaneously sort of being vindicated. If you look at it from the legal standpoint but from our relationships, in point she's the face. You know when President Trump size of these failures and Christian Nielsen appears to be on shaky ground. That's according to a New York Times Report Nielsen, told TK, legs that she was close to resigning, Wednesday after being paraded by the president in front of entire cabinet. Nothing said some off more Immigration- and I am told that meeting on Wednesday in the capital and was very heated, was incredibly heated. She spoke back to him about it tried to defend herself. So it's in this context of the policies that are being introduced being blocked in the courts. The number of people crossing the border rising an trumps relationship, a secretary Nielsen falling apart, that he comes up with his

I never day and other free from president Tromp. Today he is threatening to shut down the southern border where he wants to completely seal the border, one hundred percent, not let anybody commended the? U S, and if they don't start with closing the border, the closer we will keep a close relaunched. I'm not low games and how's that keep it closed for a long time, I'm not playing games and how exactly would that work? Well, we shouldn't assume that the president had any particular policy in his mind when he tweeted that he wanted to seal the border. We can assume, though, that he wasn't. Talking about, for example, cargo, moving back and forth, or people with actual visas and permission to come into the United States, but really that he's talking about shut. Down asylum and shutting down the ability of people who don't previously have permission to come into the United States and the polish

see that we know has come closer to achieving that goal. One that's been kicking around and Washington for some months now would be to get rid of us as we know it, it would no longer allow anyone to apply for asylum in the United States and instead people who need that status or wanted that status would have to stay in their home countries, similar to the way that syrian refugees apply to come to. United states apply from home wait many months go through a lot of bedding and background checks, and then only if there are proved they would be allowed to come here. Guess what could be more extreme version of limiting asylum, then literally telling people. You cannot come to this country and apply for asylum, I don't think there is a more extreme version, because I think this idea means eliminating asylum. It goes away and is thus winners in it. What was Secretary Nielsen's response to this idea, for,

What we know it's been very similar to the way she reacted to family separation, to that idea to significantly limit asylum to the ports of entry, which is that this is going to be challenged by the courts immediately. It's gonna be a huge lift to get a policy like this introduced to work out the logistics and all of it will be for not because it'll be enjoyed by the courts, and it's that opposition all and resistant stance that she's in when she walks into the White House for her meeting with the president is unclear. Who, their hands first or second, or whether they, both But what we know is that the president did not leave her with an option that he at least decided. This is gonna work you're out and she was by the end of that night,

and so what that means is the Homeland Security Secretary who oversaw some of the most controversial and impressive immigration policy, as this country has ever seen. Even she wasn't aggressive enough for President Trump answer now: she's gone and he's looking for replacement. Who will go even further obray back. You know his name, but not his past. Hbo next must watch drama series, Perry, Mason, Stars, Emmy winner, Matthew, Reese in Origin story for american fictions, most legendary criminals

and soya when a gruesome murder case falls into masons lap. Uncovering the truth means exposing a city full of corruption, and everybody is guilty. Co, storing fellow Emmi winners, Tatiana Lenny and John. Let's go new episode of Perry, Mason AIR Sundays at nine p M on HBO and stream at on each be oh MAX, Suki one who is the president turning true to replace Nielsen as you look for somebody to go further than she was willing to go he's turning to Kevin Macklewain and whose currently, the head of United States, customs and border protection that the agency that oversees, both the customs officers who you meet at the airport when you ve gone on vacation abroad, and then border patrol those at the police. The boots on the ground along the border and macklewain in his known as sort of our policy Wong, really smart and reasonable guy who's willing to work with Democrats and somebody who served President Obama, as well he's got more than ten years of experience at the agency.

We'll know him as this reasonable guy. But when you take a little bit deeper in macklewain, him was inspired to get into homeland security work right after nine eleven and at Sea BP, especially most recently when he was over seeing this agency. It really became known as a sort of policy engine with him at the centre of it coming up with ways to turn president trumps ideas into actual policies that could be carried out, you know give th us. Is this agency run out of Washington? That's over seeing all of this work. It was Magdalene and staff members that were actually physically taking children away from their parents, were physically turning asylum seekers away at the border or telling them to go elsewhere or to wait in line. So now he is moving into this room.

Where he's got even more power, but I think we can expect that will continue to do what he was doing before, which was take President troms ideas that are sort of extreme and that aren't necessarily encumbered by the immigration law, as norms. History and hill tried to translate them into something, that's practical and that can be introduced. The ground? So you know he might seem moderate at first glance he's Julie, someone with a president trusts to put the more restrictive. Maybe even extreme policies in practice and he's been involved in doing that already now we ve been elevated to do it at an even higher level exactly and it gets that'll make sense. If Nielson is seen as to reluctant to put these policies into practice than the present would turn to somebody who is willing to do that that's right who was willing to try, but remember that macklewain and is going to run up against the exact same legal framework and logistical chow,

judges that anybody else in that role is going to write to if these policies are one until legal trouble in the court's, regardless of who is leading the agency. What does it matter? In the end, if the leader of the Department of Homeland Security is Gung HO about the present policies, or is reluctantly saying? Yes, as Nielson was, I think you can look at that question. A couple of different ways on one hand, you're right that it's not I make a huge difference whose sitting in the office at the head of the Homeland Security Department, because no matter what they introduce if it violates the creation while they're gonna wind up in court, but another way of looking at it is you know: family separation only existed as an official sort of policy for what forty five days under zero tolerance, not a very long period of time before it had to end. But still I dont think that very many people are going to argue that family separation was a small thing or something that didn't effect very many people. I mean, I think it had a huge em.

So I do think that if you have a hawk running the Homeland Security Department, even when their sort of encumbered by the existing legal framework, they can make some pretty big changes, even if, ultimately, those changes wind up in court I think that Kevin Macklewain and has two things going for him in president trumps eyes. The first, like we said, is that it He knows the policies and he knows the situation on the ground like the back of his hand, and the second thing is that you on a willingness to follow President trumps weed, and so he may be the person whose best position to come up with the most legal ways to achieve president from schools and even if the policies that he comes up with dont remain in place in the long term, they might at least exist long enough to give President Trump

something to point to an show his supporters when they ask. Where are you on these campaign? Promises wary? Are you on this idea of, if not sealing the border significantly decreasing? The number of immigrants coming to the United States so even if these policies are ultimately bought by the courts. It feels like it's important to this present to have someone at the Department of Homer Kennedy who is willing to try them? And that may be enough. I think in president trumps, heart of hearts right. He would hope that you would find not only somebody was willing to try, but somebody who's going to succeed. He wants aggressive policies to be instituted in the long term, but I think it's better in his mind than nothing to have somebody who's willing to try and, as we know politically, it's better than nothing because because then the president can point to these policies that he tried to introduce, if only it wasn't for the court's, who had blocked Emma, if only it wasn't for

Congress who blocked emperor. My intention was there somebody else's fall for network exactly. He has at least an attempt to me. He's campaign promises to point to when voters ask. Why haven't you made a signal and change. So I think that having a more aggressive leader in place whose more willing to introduce these policies when they get stuck in the courts, it allows trump to blame the court's rather than his own. Ministration, forgetting in his way. He means they look. I tried, but you know these judges are blocking me, whereas it wasn't just the judges blocking him with Secretary Nielsen. It was her too if Congress is not going to change the law, and I think the assumption that they are not going to do that in time soon when it comes to basic immigration law. Is the president right to suggest that the current system is broken and the only way to fix it is to test

these new ideas, even if they push the boundaries of a law. I would say yes to the first part of your question. Most people agree that the system is broken, but when it comes to fixing the problem, I think you know what are you trying to fix in the president's mind, the problem is the vast number of people coming here to seek asylum. His idea of a fix would decrease that number. But other people see the problem as not that people are coming here to seek asylum at all, but the ways that we're dealing with them. You know we don't have space to place people physically in custody when they enter. We don't have judges to hear their cases for years and years. So if you see that is the problem, then he's not really addressing those he's not addressing those problems, and I think that's because a lot of people who agree with the president are concerned that if we come up with better systems for processing asylum seekers, we may get more organised

an efficient and in some cases, comfortable that all that will do is encourage more and more people to come and again, if the numbers themselves or what you see as the problem, then making the system better only makes it worse human. What is all this tell us about where President Trump plans to go on immigration? I think it shows that President tromp is going to continue full steam ahead to achieve his immigration goals. And that you know if there are people even informed career officials who want to stand in the way of that they're gonna be pushed out because he's very committed the goal of limiting the number of people who come to the border, regardless of many legal challenges he's already phased, those that are sure to calm the public reaction

other things. Notwithstanding we're not seeing any signs of slowing down, I think this week is actually an indicator of a ramping up of these goals, in other words, the gloves, were coming off, even though in a lot of people's minds, they thought the gloves were already that's right site. It's like another set of glass are coming up, hey. I thank you very much. Thank you. On Monday, the time supported the president tromp plans to push out more officials from the Department of Homeland Security, including the departments, General Council and the director of U S, citizenship and immigration services, as he seeks to carry out his harder line approach to him a few hours later in the latest level, set back to that approach. A federal judge blocked a Trump administration policy there

quiet those seeking asylum to wait in Mexico, than in the: U S gather cases made their way through. U S, immigration cord! The judge found that the policy violated after a long years? What else you need to know day today that faces continuing to build its maximum pressure campaign against the iranian regime? I'm announcing our attempt to designate the Islamic Revolution, a guard court, its goods force as a foreign terrorist organization, in accordance with section to nineteen of the immigration and Nationality ACT. On Monday, the Trump administrations

that that it was designating a powerful arm of the iranian military as a foreign terrorist organisation. The first time that the? U S has classified part of any country's government as such a threat for doing it, because the rainy regimes, user terrorism as a tool of state grab, makes it fundamentally different from any other government. The move was debated at the highest levels of the administration, with top officials at the Defence Department and the CIA opposing the designation arguing it could justify iranian attacks against the: U S and its allies, but the President's national Security adviser John Bull and his Secretary of state, my computer, advocated for the decision arguing. The designation would further isolate IRAN by discouraging businesses from working with its military. This historic step will have read the world's leading state, sponsored tear the financial means to spread measuring death around the world.

In response or wrongs. Government said it was designating the: U S: Central Command, which overseas military operations in the Middle EAST as a terrorist organisation as well. That's it for the deal. I'm like a well I'll, see you tomorrow, Zau con spent more than a decade building con Academy, the free remote learning platform. Now all of a sudden, it seems custom made for today we realise is one of those moments where you look left. Look right. You're, like I think this is us on a leash upper hosting pad cast net, made all the difference I'll be talking to some incredible people like Sal about how their managing the crisis, while helping others through it, find that made all the different anywhere you get your podcast created by Bank of America