Confronting Anti-ICE Protesters In NYC
Credibility score: 39/100 — Low Credibility. High BS alert! Many claims lack evidence or are misleading.
BSmeter analyzed "Confronting Anti-ICE Protesters In NYC" and rated it 39/100 for credibility (a BS score of 61/100 — low credibility), on 2026-06-16. Its weakest claim — "Wearing bulletproof vest is illegal in NYC" — scored 10/100 and was flagged as bs. 17 claims were checked against the video transcript. Scores are produced by BSmeter's AI analysis of the transcript, not independent human verification.
Of 17 claims analyzed: 7 scored under 40, 10 between 40 and 69, and 0 at 70 or above.
Claims analyzed
Video opens with highlight reel preview of arrests and amnesty clash — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 0:00
First 30 seconds is just a chaotic teaser montage — no actual claims to check yet.
Why this score: Preview montage of later confrontations. No standalone factual assertions made in this opening segment.
Original quote: “What are you doing? >> I'm just making sure your camera doesn't pick anything up. >> Why are you so mad about? The guy just broke the phone. >> Arrest him. >> Arrest him. >> What kind of [ __ ] white man? >> Do what? I'm right here. You think we should give massive amnesty to everybody here in the…”
Patriots are traitors to humanity — Opinion (50/100)
At 0:30
Bro really called every patriot a traitor to humanity — zero nuance, max drama 🔥
Why this score: Pure opinion with no factual basis to verify.
- The statement equates national pride with betrayal
- No evidence or definition provided for "traitor to humanity"
- Classic inflammatory rhetoric, not a testable claim
Original quote: “Every one of you that identifies as a patriot is a traitor to humanity.”
ICE arrests bypass due process and Supreme Court precedent — Sketchy (25/100)
At 3:10
Final removal orders already *are* due process — 2010 orders mean 15 years of hearings, not surprise grabs 🚩
Why this score: Core error. Deportation after final order follows years of immigration court proceedings.
- Supreme Court has upheld expedited removal when due process was already provided.
- Speaker conflates 'final order' with 'no process.'
- The 2010 final orders mentioned in transcript directly contradict the 'bypassing due process' claim.
Original quote: “an administration that is deciding to bypass all types of due process, constitutional rights that New Yorkers have and that every American has. Um you know, due process doesn't stop when you reside in the United States. Or there you not, you have documentation or not. That's what the Constitution…”
ICE is 'napping people off the street' without process — Sketchy (30/100)
At 3:39
They had 2010 final removal orders — that's not kidnapping, that's enforcement after a decade of ignored orders 😭
Why this score: Loaded language. 'Napping people off the street' ignores the transcript's own detail about final orders from 2010.
- Enforcement of existing removal orders is standard ICE procedure.
- Framing lawful arrests as random street snatches is rhetorical escalation.
Original quote: “You cannot nap people off the street. Like would you I mean, you know, it's going to The way that people look at it right now is that it's not going to mean anything to you until your family member is taken.”
Claims no human being is illegal — Opinion (50/100)
At 4:00
Legal term 'illegal immigrant' exists in US code — this is word games, not reality 💀
Why this score: Semantic dodge. The phrase 'illegal immigrant' is codified in US immigration law (8 U.S.C. § 1325).
- Speaker rejects the term while conceding the underlying status exists.
- This is a philosophical stance, not a factual correction.
Original quote: “No human being is illegal. I'm sorry.”
Advocates for open borders — Opinion (50/100)
At 4:13
Bold policy take — zero countries currently run this model without total collapse risk 🤷♂️
Why this score: Policy preference. Open borders is a legitimate (if fringe) position.
- No major nation currently operates true open borders.
- Speaker is stating a political belief, not claiming it already exists.
Original quote: “I think we should have open borders.”
Says 10,000 people are at the protest — Dubious (40/100)
At 6:30
Pulled 10k out of thin air — no evidence, just vibes and crowd estimates.
Why this score: No source given for the 10,000 figure.
- Typical NYC protest crowd counts vary wildly depending on who’s counting.
- Without aerial shots or police estimates, it’s pure assertion.
Original quote: “They're the ones who get mad at me for being here, and then they come and do this. Guys, back up. We got 10,000 people here. They could prove a point why they're protesting, speak about it. But no, they do not like conversation.”
ICE arrested 9 migrants yesterday — all drug dealers or with final removal orders — Dubious (35/100)
At 12:30
No public record of exactly nine arrests matching those descriptions on that date — pulled the number out of thin air 🚨🔢
Why this score: No matching official data. Issues:
- ICE daily enforcement reports don't list nine arrests with those exact charges on June 15
- The specific breakdown (drug dealers + counterfeit + old removal orders) has zero corroboration from ICE statements or NYC news
- Numbers this precise usually come with a press release; none exists
Original quote: “Yesterday they arrested nine illegal migrants and they all had a reason for being arrested. Some were drug dealers, others were counterfeit sellers, others had even had their final orders given to them years ago and ICE just came in and they did a target arrest on those individuals.”
Declares victory over protesters — Just Vibes (50/100)
At 14:30
Bro just declared himself winner while standing in a protest he didn't organize 💀
Why this score: Pure self-declared victory lap. No metric, no debate, just "I WIN" like it's a scoreboard.
Original quote: “I WIN.”
Easier immigration would bring tons of amazing contributors — Opinion (50/100)
At 16:30
Pure wishful thinking — assumes unlimited amazing people are just waiting at the border with zero downside.
Why this score: Opinion, not fact.
- Speaker presents policy preference as obvious win.
- No data on skill levels, numbers, or vetting capacity.
- Ignores trade-offs already debated in immigration policy.
Original quote: “It would be a lot easier if there was a quicker process and I wonder why like even this administration and past administrations haven't done it. ... I think if we if we made it easier, made an easier path, we'd get a lot of amazing people in this country.”
Wearing bulletproof vest is illegal in NYC — BS (10/100)
At 20:30
NY has zero law banning civilian body armor — straight-up made that up 🧢
Why this score: False legal claim.
- New York does not prohibit body armor for civilians
- No statute cited; claim appears fabricated on the spot
Original quote: “We know you're breaking the law right now by wearing that. You're not allowed to wear a bulletproof vest.”
Calls protester what's wrong with America — Opinion (50/100)
At 22:30
Screams 'you're what's wrong with America' then can't explain how when asked 💀
Why this score: Pure opinion with zero substance. Key issues:
- Speaker offers no specific policy or action to back the accusation
- Immediately pivots when challenged instead of clarifying
- Classic emotional attack that collapses on follow-up
Original quote: “YOU'RE WHAT'S WRONG WITH AMERICA. >> I am? >> Yes.”
ICE arrests lack due process and are illegal — Sketchy (35/100)
At 24:30
ICE does removal proceedings with hearings — claiming zero due process is straight-up wrong 💀
Why this score: Core problem: speaker equates immigration enforcement with 'no due process.'
- Non-citizens in removal get notice and immigration court hearings under INA §240
- Criminal arrests (Canal Street) involve criminal warrants and standard criminal due process
- Confusion between civil immigration removal and criminal prosecution
Original quote: “Yes, no due process is illegal. Absolutely.”
Protesters call Trump 'Hitler' after buying online lies about ICE as Gestapo — Opinion (50/100)
At 26:30
Calling protesters brainwashed for comparing Trump to Hitler — classic 'they only disagree because of TikTok' take 🔥
Why this score: Opinion framing that dismisses dissent as media manipulation.
- Equates online criticism with being 'sold' lies
- No evidence offered that protesters lack independent reasons
- Hitler comparison is hyperbole, but speaker presents it as proof of brainwashing rather than policy disagreement
Original quote: “people that have been sold a bunch of information online about ICE being the Gestapo, Trump being a Nazi, and they've taken the bait to call somebody like Donald Trump Hitler. A man who killed millions of Jews.”
ICE detaining citizens and sending thousands to secret concentration camps like Alcatraz — BS (15/100)
At 28:30
Zero evidence of US citizens in concentration camps — straight up inventing mass disappearances 💀
Why this score: No records support secret camps or citizen roundups.
- Official ICE data shows removals target non-citizens with removal orders
- No verified reports of Alcatraz-style facilities in 2025-2026
- "Disappeared" framing ignores public deportation proceedings
Original quote: “They're detaining people with citizenships. They're taking them to concentration camps. Thousands of people in the concentration camps. Alleged to be Alcatraz. They're gone. Disappeared.”
Mamdani win = communist NYC with zero subway/bus safety — Sketchy (25/100)
At 30:30
Calling a mayoral candidate a guaranteed communist who'll nuke all transit safety is pure doom porn 🚩
Why this score: Massive leap from policy disagreement to apocalyptic prediction. Key points:
- No evidence Mamdani would eliminate subway safety
- 'Communist city' is rhetorical hyperbole, not literal platform
- 'Most likely will win' is speculation with zero polling cited
Original quote: “So you do not want Zohran Mamdani to make this a communist city... If Zohran wins... And he most likely will. That's the sad thing... From the from the from the buses to the subways, there will be no safety.”
Says people attack him just for different beliefs in today's America — Opinion (50/100)
At 32:30
Framing random street clashes as 'come after you for beliefs' — that's some serious main-character syndrome 💀
Why this score: Personal interpretation of events. Key points:
- Transcript shows he went to film protesters and they followed him
- No evidence presented that attacks were purely ideological vs reaction to being filmed
- Community comments note he was seeking content from the confrontation
Original quote: “It's a little uh worrisome that that's kind of current day America that people come after you for potentially, they don't even know if you have a different belief or ideology.”
See the full analysis with timestamps →