Transcript of 🚨Top Trump Official Crashes at Hearing over World Cup Fiasco!!! New

A top Trump cabinet official just made numerous incriminating admissions during testimony before the United States Senate, and a number of the incriminating admissions relate to the upcoming World Cup, which seems like it's gonna be an absolute disaster under the Trump regime. So Department of Homeland Security Secretary Mark Wayne Mullen just testified before the United States Senate, and there has been a lot of concern over Mark Wayne Mullin threatening to shut down all international travel to blue states and blue cities if they don't comply with Donald Trump's plans to send ICE and Border Patrol to round up more migrants and torture them and send them into detention centers. Mark Wayne Mullin said that he was going to remove all Customs and Border Patrol agents from the international airports in these blue states and blue cities, which would effectively shut these airports down. And that would shut down all international travel. So obviously there was a lot of questions that senators wanted to ask Mark Wayne Mullen about that and about other topics like, would you comply with court orders blocking you from doing that or blocking you from engaging in other unlawful behavior? Look, there are a lot of people, from other countries who are not going to be coming to the United States over fears about ICE harassing, torturing, detaining people who travel to the United States.

There's a lot of boycotts taking place here and abroad of the US hosting the World Cup. In addition, there was an update in the past 24, 48 hours where we saw that Norway officially is, uh, protesting and sending an official complaint about FIFA giving Donald Trump a peace prize through Gianni Infantino, which shows bias, which FIFA isn't supposed to do. So let me just show you what went down though at this United States Senate hearing where Mark Wayne Mullen testified, and he was asked some pretty basic questions. You had Democratic Senator Murphy saying, look, if you're blocked from doing certain things by federal judges, if you are given these court orders, would you comply with court orders? And you'll see Mark Wayne Mullin says no, he's not going to comply with any court orders if he views the court orders as being too political for him and the Trump regime. Here, play this clip.

Yeah.

Will you, will you not, um, implement court orders?

If we didn't think that, if we didn't think courts were politicized, then I would probably be able to answer that. But we see courts over and over again, that use their bench for their political, uh, opinion, not just the rule of law. And we can see that because we see how many times—

orders you obey based upon whether you believe that what I said to be—

no, no, politically, don't put words in my mouth.

What are you saying then?

What I'm saying is we'll enforce the law and we're never going to break the Constitution.

You just said that you will not follow every court order because you know—

the—

Chris, Senator, don't, don't start putting words in my mouth. That's not what I said. I said I will never break the Constitution. We're going to enforce the law.

Will, will you implement court orders when they tell you to stop?

And you're making an assumption on court orders. I haven't seen—

will you not?

I, I am going to enforce the law and I'll never break the Constitution.

I think, listen, if you're a Republican or Democrat on this committee, you should be really, really freaked out.

We should be really concerned about the rulings that come out of the courts and how often they get overturned.

Falls apart if you are telling me that they fall apart when you have a judge just makes his political opinion from a bench, they're outside the law too.

Not all judges are above the law, but sometimes they think they are. That's why we see lower courts get overturned by higher courts constantly.

To which Senator Murphy pointed out, so I guess anytime somebody disagrees with you, or anytime you disagree with someone, you just say, ah, they're politicizing things. That's your whole entire rap here. Here, play this clip.

Access is not true, and I would suggest they spend more time in their own prison system.

Endless. Anytime somebody disagrees with you, whether it's a member of this committee, whether it's state public health agency, whether it's a federal court, they are politicizing the Department of—

Sir, that's exactly what you're doing.

Homeland Security. Um, I've just been sort of chilled by our interaction.

Then we got to hear from Senator Van Hollen, who cross-examined, uh, Mark Wayne Mullen here and said, look, there's just so many false statements coming out of the Department of Homeland Security about Alex Pretti, about Renee Goode, about Julio Cesar Moses Siles about so many things. You guys have a pattern of lying, wouldn't you say? Take a watch of this cross-examination right here. Let's play it.

Secretary, uh, you'd agree that it's important for the American public to be able to trust what DHS says, right? And that it's important that the department put out factual information. You agree that that's important?

I think it's important for elected officials.

I think it's very important for everybody. So I'm holding up a press release here, Mr. Secretary, dated January of this year. It's before your time. It says that a person named Julio Sosa Silas violently assaulted a DHS agent. I want to read the quote in here from former Secretary Nuland. She said, quote, what we saw last night in Minneapolis was an attempted murder of federal law enforcement. Our officer was ambushed and attacked by 3 individuals who beat him with snow shovels and the handles of brooms. Fearing for his life, the officer fired a defensive shot, unquote. That's an untrue statement, isn't it, Mr. Secretary?

What we have been briefed on, yes.

Yeah.

And it came to light because the city of Minneapolis had a camera system, and state authorities from Hennepin County have pursued the investigation and recently arrested this officer. Are you aware of that?

I believe so, yes.

So this is part of a pattern we've seen, because I do want to turn to the case of Alex Preddy. And in that case, Secretary Noem said that he was engaged in an act of domestic terrorism. She said that it looked like Alex Preddy intended to, quote, inflict maximum damage and to kill law enforcement, unquote. That wasn't true either, was it?

I'm sorry, I didn't hear this.

That wasn't a true statement of her statement.

I, I don't— I can't speak on her behalf, but it's not what I recall seeing.

You agree the facts don't support that statement?

Well, I didn't make the statement.

I didn't say you did. I asked you whether you understand that the facts don't support this.

The investigation would say that's probably not accurate.

Yeah.

Okay, so again, we know that because of the video, um, Secretary Noem also asserted that Renee Goode was engaged in an act of domestic terrorism. So look, the reason I'm asking you this, Mr. Secretary, is I want to know if you're going to be willing to provide state investigators access to evidence they have requested in their ongoing investigations into the killings of Alex Pretti and Renee Goode.

Sir, as you know, the FBI is set up to do the investigation on federal— all law officers, um, and we investigate it from the federal side as a federal action, not a state action.

But you're aware of the fact that the state has authority and jurisdiction as well, right? Under—

actually, actually, under the authority, the federal prosecution and hands stays within the federal, um, government. And so the FBI is set up to do those investigations. And I do want to say something too. You, you We arrest between—

Mr. Secretary, I'm sorry, I have limited time.

But you said you accused there to be a pattern.

If the chair is going to permit additional questions, I was asking what you said is a pattern.

You made an accusation that it was a pattern.

And Mr. Secretary, I went on. There was a pattern. The Secretary, Secretary Noem, said the same thing. But you said all statements regarding—

Not a pattern. That's a pattern. We arrest 1,900 people a day. There is not a pattern of this.

Please. The reality is—

exaggeration of words. Words matter.

They do.

And I will tell you, you have all been pushing that words matter.

And so you say there's a pattern, there's not a pattern. Oh, I would say 3 in a row is a pattern.

No, sir, Secretary, that's not a pattern.

We arrest 1,900 people a day. Semantics aside, the reality is this is a big problem.

There is no semantics behind this. A pattern of 3 people when we have 1,900 a day is not a pattern.

You've just acknowledged your predecessor made statements that were not factually accurate. I want to, I want to go— so it sounds like you're not willing to share evidence with the state authorities who are trying to get to the bottom of this. And I will just say, Mr. Secretary, that given the statements that came out of this administration, including the White House, it is hard to trust this administration to do independent investigation. That's why it's important.

Yet you trust the last administration?

I didn't— I'm talking about giving it to the authorities.

I'm just saying, don't call an apple what an apple is. Don't sit there and start picking one administration to believe in another administration.

Not the Secretary Just, just please calm down.

If you've been thinking about upgrading your home, let me tell you about Article. One of the things I really like about Article is that they make it incredibly easy to find furniture that looks great without spending weeks trying to match different pieces together. So whether your style is modern, coastal, or Scandinavian-inspired, everything feels thoughtfully designed and works together seamlessly. For example, I got this mid-century modern coffee table that I am obsessed with, and it fits perfectly in my place. And the whole process— ordering it, asking questions to customer service, getting it, setting it up— all of it was an absolute breeze. What stands out immediately to me is the quality. From the packaging to the craftsmanship, you could tell that these pieces are built to last. The materials feel substantial, the finishes look premium, and many items arrive mostly assembled, which is always a huge plus for me. It's that rare combination of great design, durability, and value. The shopping experience is so easy too. Article offers fast, affordable shipping across the US and Canada. And if you need help pulling a room together, their customer care team is available 7 days a week and even offers free interior design services.

That was super helpful to me. Plus, with a 30-day satisfaction guarantee, you can shop with confidence knowing you could return it if it's not the perfect fit. Article is offering our listeners $50 off your first purchase of $100 or more. To claim, visit article.com/mitas and the discount will be automatically applied at checkout. That's article.com/mitas, M-E-I-D-A-S, for $50 off your first purchase of $100 or more. Check it out.

More cross-examination here from Senator Van Hollen, this time on Abrego Garcia, and saying So now that Abrego Garcia has had the criminal charges dismissed against him, uh, would you be willing to allow him to just leave the country, go to Costa Rica, and be able to live his life without the Trump regime torturing and harassing him? You know, the whole world is watching the behavior of ICE right now, especially right before the World Cup. So how are you going to behave here? Play this clip.

Sir, just, just please calm down. I'm going to ask you about Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Are you aware of the fact that in that case he has agreed to be removed to Costa Rica and that Costa Rica has agreed to accept them?

No, I'm not.

Okay, so I'd like you to look into this because essentially what the administration did was say to him when he was returned to the United States after being wrongfully deported to El Salvador, and the administration admitted it, wrongfully deported him. After he was turned, they leveled new criminal charges against him, and they said to him, if you plead guilty to these criminal charges, we'll send you to Costa Rica, and if you don't, we'll send you to Liberia. Well, he said, I'm not going to plead guilty to these charges. And it turns out that just a short time ago, a federal judge determined that the administration had engage in a vindictive prosecution against him. And so my question now is, will you, the administration, agree to have him removed to Costa Rica rather than engaging in punishing him for pursuing his constitutional rights? That's the question. If you don't have full information here, Mr. Secretary, I understand.

My question is, is the gentleman here in this country legally?

Secretary, the time is expired.

Person was illegally removed to El Salvador and this administration has admitted—

he is still in this country illegally.

This is why— this is the point, is he has said he will be removed to Costa Rica and Costa Rica has accepted that. The point, Mr. Secretary, is great if he's willing—

the administration—

the point is that they're engaged in what a judge already found to be an vindictive prosecution. Prosecution. And now they're trying to leverage all this to try to get him to go to Liberia instead of Costa Rica. It's a gross abuse of process. Anybody looking at this can see that the senator's time has expired.

I'm good.

Thank you.

And then, of course, people here and abroad have a great deal of concern about the training that ICE officers receive. And clearly they are not being trained appropriately.. And even if they are being somewhat trained, which they aren't, what their behavior is on the streets is absolutely abhorrent. And they've engaged in these regular crimes against humanity. So you had Senator Murray cross-examining, uh, Mark Wayne Mullen over here. And she said, look, I was in the room where we were talking about adding reforms to ICE and Border Patrol agents. So they don't go and start attacking everybody and they don't behave this way. And then Markwayne Mullin's like, well, I was instrumental in these negotiations. And Senator Murray's like, no, you weren't. When you used to be a senator, you weren't even at the meeting. I, I, like a pathological liar, like I was at the meeting. You weren't there. Here, play this clip.

We're recently talking about legislation to require judicial warrants, restore training standards, and protect sensitive locations from raids. But while you and Tom Homan say you've made some of those changes, The American people haven't seen the proof of that. So I want to ask you today, what are your current training requirements for agents? Training requirements.

Thank you for the question. I want to remind the senator that I was part of the negotiation, negotiating those reforms. And I think you're aware of that. So I actually know what happened during those—

I know you weren't in the room, but I do know you were aware of them.

No, I was. I was very involved in it.

But you were not.

The back and forth. No, I was very involved.

I was in the room. You were not in the room.

I know you were. He was very involved in it because we're talking about the House. That's the matter I asked you a question. You know, Senator, you know that we agreed to all this stuff that you said. And the fact is that you guys walked away because you had primary elections. No, we had agreed. Mr. Secretary, you walked away because you would never get to yes. And so we walked away and did reconciliation because you were never going to get to yes between Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries. And you know that to be a fact. And you can't, you can't pull the wool over my eyes because I was part of the negotiation.

I'm telling you, I was in the room and we turned it.

I want to ask you, it was interesting. I was involved in that too. If you want to start talking about training, we're going to July.

And then Department of Homeland Security Secretary Mark Wayne Mullen gave an interview to CBS where he said, yeah, of course we're going into, of course ICE is going to be at the World Cup games. Of course we're going to be there. Here, let's play this clip.

We received a confirmation that ICE will be at the World Cup and immigration arrests are not off the table. Now, Major, he did say that ICE agents won't be there for mass roundups, but they're also not taking their immigration enforcement hats off. Take a listen.

We're not there to— that we're going to be enforcing mass immigration, but we're there to enforce the law. So if we find a felon or we find someone doing custom If you find a criminal, you will arrest them.

But the mission at the World Cup is not immigration enforcement.

We're not there. Well, ICE always says immigration enforcement. We're always going to do that. But we're not there for solely that purpose. We're in there to do our job. Immigration custom enforcement.

But immigration enforcement at the World Cup is not off the table because that is the mission of ICE.

We're, as I said, we're not there to go round up mass individuals, but we are We're always looking for the worst of the worst. We're going to continue to do that. But the ICE footprint is much bigger than that. As I said, it's Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

More from Senator Murphy right here to Markwayne Mullin. Let's take a watch. Let's play it.

Secretary, I think you were crazy to have taken on this job, um, but at your confirmation hearing, you did promise that you would get DHS out of the headlines. Uh, we took you at your word, but nothing has really gotten better. Um, in fact, you spent the first 2 months of your tenure threatening to suspend international arrivals in states represented by Democrats. Not only would that throw our entire air travel system into chaos, it's completely illegal, which underscores the main issue of this hearing. The reason why Democrats and Republicans were not able to find agreement on the underlying DHS appropriations bill is because never before in the history of our nation has a federal agency been run so far off the rails as the Department of Homeland Security. Every day, this agency is breaking the law at scale and wasting billions of taxpayer dollars.

And then I'll just share with you this new poll that has these shocking— not all that shocking— results about Americans' opinion on ICE at the World Cup. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Mark Wayne Mullin said last month that ICE would be patrolling U.S. stadiums where matches are taking place as the 2026 FIFA World Cup draws nearer. And immigration ICE officers are going to be there. A Washington Post University of Maryland poll released on Tuesday, yesterday, found that 65% of Americans oppose ICE officers patrolling US stadiums during the tournament. This includes a whopping 92% of Democrats and 72% of independent voters right there. So there you have it. Let me know what you think about that testimony. Hit subscribe. Let's get to 7 million subscribers. And thanks for watching, everybody.

Thanks for watching. Be sure to add the Midas Touch Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts for new updates every single day.