Fox News98%
‘Don't point your finger at me!’: FIERY clash erupts in Congress 69%
6/25/2026, 5:30:08 PM
BS Summary: This video contains 38 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Negativity Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Availability Heuristic as the most egregious example at 28.4% saturation with 248 hits. Analysis detected 2,604 faulty-reasoning hits from 873 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 61.6% and a BS Rank of 69% (6,991 of 21,887 videos). This video is worse (more manipulative) than 68.10% of the video peer group.
Welcome back.
DHS Secretary Mark Wayne
Mullen on Capitol Hill testifying today
before a House Subcommittee on immigration detention oversight.
Things got heated
mostly over the administration's immigration enforcement.
Take a listen.
>> Again, it is my time. 3,900 children were separated from their family.
>> 450,000 kids were lost during the Biden administration.
>> Mr. Secretary, do not interrupt.
>> Don't you point your finger at me. Don't you
>> I will point my finger at
>> Don't you be a hypocrite then. Then you be as upset as you should be as upset about the 450,000 kids that were lost.
>> didn't say a word about it. Mr. For years you never said a word.
>> Mr. Secretary.
>> Could you put him in his place for for
>> You don't yell at me.
I'm >> be put in your place.
>> Well,
uh let's bring in former acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf for reaction to that.
I mean, theatrics aside, Chad, if you look at the issues here, two things can be true at once.
What do you say?
>> Well, if you just look at the the topic that they were discussing and you're talking about, you know, separating or you're talking about children lost, what the congresswoman there doesn't acknowledge is that during the Biden administration almost 500,000 kids came across that border without a parent, trafficked into the United States and that the Biden administration lost over 300,000 of them.
Now, I think that's the point that Secretary Mullen was trying to make is if you really care about children, where were you for the four years of the Biden administration?
But what I will say is that I think
Secretary Mullen's frustrated.
I watched some of that hearing today and he doesn't get the chance to respond.
Instead, you have Democratic members up there for five to eight minutes making a speech,
uh throwing out a lot of stats that are inaccurate and not acknowledging again what occurred during the Biden administration and he doesn't get a chance to respond.
frustrated uh from that.
>> Couple of uh other things to get to while we have you, Chad.
Two rulings handed down by the Supreme Court today on immigration.
The main one here giving the president essentially the administration full authority to conduct oversight of the TPS program as he sees fit.
This impacting up to a million people, I understand, here in the US.
>> Yeah, these two rulings from the Supreme Court are monumental.
It's a win.
It's a dramatic win for the Trump administration, for common sense, for America first, and the like.
The first one, as you mentioned, allows the administration to end TPS or temporary protected status for any number of countries.
And And it's in the first name of the description, temporary.
It's supposed to be temporary in nature, but some of these designations have lasted for decades.
And so, of course, anytime that you try to end that or you go against decades-long position, you're going to get sued, and that's what the Trump administration did.
We got sued during
Trump 45 when we tried to end TPS, and they certainly have over the last year and a half. Finally made its way to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court ruled.
very clearly that it's in statute that there is no judicial review of this designation or this determination by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
And yet, we've seen activist judges weigh in and actually provide some judicial review, and the Supreme Court said, "Stop. Time out. There is no judicial review. What the DHS Secretary rules is the final word."
And so, it's a
it's certainly a win for the Trump administration.
>> Big decision.
We're getting new warnings now, Chad, from the FBI about the future of drone warfare here in the United States.
Think most Americans are familiar with the idea of military drones being deployed overseas.
Take a listen uh the deputy director though talking about how they could eventually be used here in the United States much like Ukraine is using them in Russia.
>> Really it's going to be 5G capability and LTE capability, right? So that means somebody in China can control a drone
over New Orleans. Uh and that for us makes that much more difficult uh to find the pilot, question the pilot.
>> I guess the question Chad here is why we're not seeing that already or at least attempts.
>> Yeah, look, this isn't a new threat.
This is something that we we've dealt with now for the last several years,
which is you're seeing drone technology just explode overseas and particularly in theater.
And the Department of War is certainly utilizing this as well for their own capacity and capabilities.
And the question is here domestically whether it's at large venues or other other sites and certainly the World Cup is in in prime focus right now.
Uh there's a variety of reasons why really we haven't seen a lot of attacks here.
There are certainly been attempted attacks.
attacks that law enforcement has foiled.
Speakers
6speakers9.6%attributed speech789writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Selected voice
100%flagged-word coverageFBI
20 attributed words24% of attributed speech97% writer coverage
Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.