Special Counsel Robert Mueller recently broke his silence on the Russia investigation, and Democrats are ramping up calls for impeachment. Today, Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., joins the podcast to weigh in on Mueller, impeachment, and a subject very important to his state: border security.

We also cover these stories:

  • President Donald Trump steps up attacks on Mueller.
  • Missouri’s last abortion clinic could be closing shortly.
  • Fetal “heartbeat bill” sent to governor’s desk in Louisiana.

The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet,iTunes, SoundCloud, Google Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

Daniel Davis: I’m joined now by Congressman Andy Biggs. He represents Arizona’s 5th congressional district in the House of Representatives. Congressman, thanks for being on.

Rep. Andy Biggs: Thanks for having me, Daniel. Good to be with you.

Davis: So, first thing I want to ask you: We’ve recently seen Special Counsel Robert Mueller give a statement breaking his silence after more than two years on his report. What do you make of his statement about his findings in the report?

Biggs: Well, I was very disappointed that he even made a statement. It was unnecessary. I thought it was reckless and irresponsible, quite frankly. So unnecessary. Why? Because he said himself almost right off the bat, he said, “I’m not going to say anything more than what is in the report already.” Well then, that should’ve been the shortest news conference in history. He should’ve said, “Thank you for coming,” after that. But then he went on and tried to basically justify some of his findings with regard to obstruction of justice, and light up what he certainly would know with his experience, my impeachment-minded judiciary colleagues.

Davis: Yes.

Biggs: So you’re going to see, and we did see this, immediately Chairman Jerry Nadler, all these people on the Judiciary Committee, they say, “Okay. So now we have the reason,” basically the constant bell light to go forward and do this thing with impeachment.

Davis: Yeah. It seems like Mueller wanted to stop short of saying there was any obstruction of justice, but wanted to give a nod to some members of Congress that they could pursue that.

Biggs: Yeah. Exactly right. But, I mean, think of how he did it. He basically flipped the constitutional presumptions on end. He said, “We didn’t quite get there and find that there was indictable material.” I mean, that’s what he wrote. But then he flipped it on its head because if you don’t find indictable material, guess what? You don’t charge, and that’s all you say. It’s a bill or no bill type of thing. And I was very disgusted with it, and I think we’re in a situation where you’re going to see within the next couple months, the flood waters that call for impeachment are going to breach the den.

Davis: Okay. Well, I was just going to ask about that because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been trying to hold that back. I think that she knows it would damage the Democratic Party, but you think that she won’t be able to hold it back?

Biggs: She won’t be able to hold it back. I mean, you have some people that are … who otherwise I would say have taken a more moderate approach to it, a more wait-and-see. They’re now basically using this as justification to go forward. When I say this, I’m talking about the Mueller statement. Nancy Pelosi won’t be able to hold back. I mean, don’t forget, two votes switched the other way, she doesn’t become speaker of the House. So she’s got to placate everybody. She’s got to walk a very sharp-edged razor to make this work because don’t forget, she’s got 20-plus seats that are tip-able. So she could lose those seats very easily.

I think she also has a legacy issue that she’s concerned about. If the House goes back to majority-Republican based on an impeachment deal, that’ll be twice that she’s been speaker and she’s lost the majority. So these all figure into it. But I think she doesn’t want to do this. I think she is a smart politician and understands the damage. I also think that the polling data that I’m aware of indicates that the vast majority of unaffiliated voters don’t want impeachment. Well, you’ve got a Democrat majority that wants impeachment, a Republican majority doesn’t want impeachment. But the people who will help decide this next election are unaffiliated, and they don’t want impeachment.

Davis: Yeah. Well, when you talk to your constituents about this, what do they say?

Biggs: They say it’s over and move on. Let’s see something else. Talk about something else. I mean, really. That’s even from my people who are staunchly pro-Trump. They’re like, “What’s with the Democrats? Can’t we move onto something else?” So they’re agitated, frustrated, and they want to get going.

Davis: A big issue for your state is immigration and border security. I wanted to ask you, how has the recent surge in illegal immigration affected your district in Arizona?

Biggs: Well, it’s effected basically the entire country, and I’ll tell you how it has. My district is a suburban district of the Phoenix metro area.  And just the raw numbers that you have of people crossing the border … so we’re apprehending 109,000 in April, 103,000 in March, 76,000 in February. You’re talking over 300,000 people that are being apprehended at our border. A year ago they told me we caught 1 in 2. Four months ago, they told me we were catching 1 in 3. Now they say we have no idea because what’s happening is they’re sending groups of people over. We’ll have agents go, all their time is taken up with them, and we know other groups are coming in. Some of them are bad people. Some of them are drug people, and you’ve got human trafficking.

So let me tell you how it impacts not just my district but the other districts. You’ve got opioids coming through at unprecedented levels. So we’re interdicting, but they claim and believe we’re catching maybe 10 to 15%. Another thing that you’ve got to realize too, and this is critical to understand, is the human trafficking component to this is awful. We know that children are being recycled. Former Secretary Kirstjen Nielson testified to that.

Davis: What do you mean by recycled?

Biggs: So they get better treatment as family units, shorter terms in custody, a parole, and get out the door. They get to do all this stuff. But here’s the deal. The Drug Enforcement Agency tells me in a briefing I had a month ago that they have had to work with local law enforcement because people are coming in. They’re all using the same sponsor, same sponsor’s address in mainly five cities in this country. One of them being Houston, one being Charleston, South Carolina. And what they found is people are going there. Forty and 50 people are going to the same address. When they get there, a drug cartel affiliate greets them with fraudulent Social Security and other fraudulent ID. But we’ve given them a work permit with the parole. So that is important to them.

So they get to work. In the meantime, they also have kids that are there. There were three children at this one facility that they went in and busted everybody, and they were just waiting to send them back to be used again as props for family units at the border. This human trafficking is horrific.

Now the other aspect of this, the cartel affiliates are literally putting these people into indentured servitude situations. So they’ll say, “Okay. You owe us another $50,000. You’re going to work for us until you’ve paid it off.” And then they’ve got this other pipeline of people coming back to the same place. The person that they busted had made millions of dollars in 18 months from these illegal aliens. This is what’s going on. It is throughout the country. It’s pervasive. We’re overrun. We are letting literally hundreds of thousands of people into this country who are otherwise illegal aliens, and we’re giving them work permits to work in the country as well.

Davis: Well, something that the president speaks a lot about is the asylum laws, which allow folks to just apply for asylum and then get in while they’re waiting for their hearing and not show up for the hearing. Do you think Congress has any will to close those loopholes, to at least bring some order to the process?

Biggs: I doubt it. I’ll tell you why. I mean, I just was at an event yesterday with a Democratic colleague of mine, and he didn’t seem to have the will to close the asylum loophole. But here’s the way it works. I show up with a kid, I declare asylum. There’s no place for me in the inn. So they put people in that have been a couple days. I go in for a couple days, I come out. When I come out, I have basically an initial appearance. They parole me. They give me a work permit. I go off in there. I’ve declared asylum, but I will never come back for the credible fear hearing, the actual asylum hearing because the court dates are two to five years off. So Congress has got to do that.

There’s some things that the administration can do too, and they’re doing some of it. They’re training some, very few, border patrol agents to be asylum officers. Basically do the credible fear examinations.

We can eliminate some of the parole for some of these people so they don’t just get out. We can try to find ways to detain them and keep them as long as possible. We can get Mexico to enter into an agreement with us that is a legal, true international agreement where they would keep the last safe country—just like Canada is in the north, they would be the last safe country. So if you’re coming from Guatemala, we’re still going to put you back in Mexico. We can do these things, the administration can do these things, and really I’ve asked McAleenan who’s the acting homeland security secretary to do these things because quite frankly, Congress is not acting. Sad to say.

Davis: Well, what’s holding them back do you think?

Biggs: Two things. When the Republicans had the House, I introduced legislation that I couldn’t get the leadership to move on. For whatever reason, they would not move on that, and I had one-on-ones with leadership saying, “Please.” And they didn’t buy it as a crisis. Now you’ve got Democrats in charge, they don’t buy it as a crisis. It’s not what they want to do. I mean, think of it, you’ve got the speaker of the House who comes from one of the biggest sanctuary cities in the country. Sanctuary state. It is contrary to their policy will to do something on this.

Davis: Well, I sure how there’s some action on this, you’ve got a long time until the next Congress. I wanted to also just mention your podcast. You’re also a podcast host. It’s called “What’s the Biggs Idea,” is that right?

Biggs: “What’s The Biggs Idea.”

Davis: I love that. And it can be found on iTunes, is that right?

Biggs: iTunes is your best bet to find them or you can go and link up with my congressional website, which is biggs.house.gov.

Davis: Fantastic. Biggs.house.gov. Well, Congressman Biggs, really appreciate your time today.

Biggs: Thanks, Daniel. Good to be with you.