Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 29, 2023 - Rudy Giuliani

01:28:36

America's Mayor Live (E178): Supreme Court Strikes Down Affirmative Action in College Admissions

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Ready?
	Yep, we're live.
	Ready, get set, go!
	Remember that when you were a kid?
	Ready, get set, go!
	This is Rudy Giuliani and he's ready, get set, go for America's Mayor Live from America.
	You know, I like it when we travel and we go to different parts of America because I love America like you do.
	I think that's why you listen to this show.
	Because there are so many people that don't love America anymore, particularly those in the Democrat Party who constantly are beating us down and beating us around and they don't see the beauty and the greatness of this place and it's amazing what they're missing.
	I feel very, very sorry.
	I feel very, very sorry for them.
	But today was a historic day with a court decision that will be studied For years and years and years and years in law school, the main opinion was written by the Chief Justice Roberts, which is usually the case in a historic decision when he's in the majority.
	The chief, of course, can always give it away.
	Maybe the most important decision, not necessarily for the judicial opinion.
	It was a good opinion by Justice Roberts, by the way.
	That's as a lawyer and a lawyer who knew him when he got out of law school and came to work as a special assistant for Edward Levy in the Justice Department.
	Or was it Bill Smith?
	I can't remember.
	It was my first or second time in the Justice Department.
	I do believe now it was for Bill Smith because he worked with Ken Starr.
	And he was a very, very fine young man at the time.
	And now he's the Chief Justice of the United States.
	Quite brilliant and quite nice.
	And I know there's lots of different opinions about him.
	And at times I get really angry at him when he doesn't come out the way that I like.
	But, um, This was very, very necessary and difficult.
	Not difficult legally.
	This is an easy decision legally.
	This is very much like Roe against Wade.
	As a legal matter, they were easy.
	Roe against Wade was a concocted, non-constitutional, completely rogue decision in which they had to make up They had to make up a right of privacy that doesn't exist in the Constitution.
	And then from the right of privacy, they had to make up a right to an abortion that doesn't exist in the Constitution.
	And by the time you were finished, they had made up so many rights that it was a disgrace illegally.
	Forget the social issues about abortion and the moral issues about abortion and everything else.
	So for years, it was It was on a foundation of really weak jurisprudence.
	Same thing with affirmative action.
	Affirmative action exists to cure the damage done by racial discrimination.
	But then in order to do that, it discriminates.
	Probably not logically the best idea to start with.
	Defensible In the sense that there weren't many ways to really fix it quickly.
	But still, as a legal matter, very, very hard to concoct the jurisprudence that would support it.
	So I think Justice Roberts knocked it down pretty easily.
	Let's look at it this way.
	The Constitution basically says that you cannot discriminate against Someone based on race.
	You can discriminate.
	There are what are called protected classes.
	You can't discriminate based on race, religion, ethnic background, sex, and now sexual orientation.
	Other areas of discrimination, like if you like somebody or don't like somebody, or it's a private situation, I mean, you can make choices.
	But here you're taking what is arguably the results of centuries of racial discrimination against black people, slavery, and then the various practices that existed after slavery, that I think we all would agree imposed a very unfair damage on them That was not imposed on others, even others who were discriminated against.
	Not as if discrimination didn't exist against others.
	It was just a special kind of discrimination.
	Very, very virulent.
	The only discrimination on which we had a civil war.
	So affirmative action was invented as a way to fix it.
	And I thought from the very, very beginning, it was a mistake.
	And I think when we see the whole history of this, we're going to see that there would have been better ways to do it in hindsight, and ones that didn't make the problem worse.
	Because I think affirmative action just prolonged the underlying issues that had to be resolved, which was social conditions, economic conditions, educational conditions, That only got worse.
	And then, to then make choices not based on merit, if you're not careful about quickly fixing it, just carries on lack of merit into the next generation, and the next one, and the next one, and the next one.
	So, this was coming It has a tremendous amount of opposition to it because there's a tremendous amount of misunderstanding of the value of it.
	It really doesn't have much value.
	It just complicates the problem and doesn't solve it.
	And I do think by hook or by crook, by methods that we didn't intend, but human ingenuity and the strength of the African-American people who And as many people who can be subjected to horrible things and rise above it, we now have a very strong, very solid, very, very, very balanced African-American community in America.
	We have large percentages of brilliant people.
	We have large percentages of enormously talented, hardworking people.
	We have large percentages of average people.
	Thank God, because that's what we basically mostly are, average people.
	Not terribly different because of our race, unless something external happens to create that.
	And then we have certain percentages of bad people.
	And in certain places, the vestiges of racial discrimination and even slavery have remained and been continued.
	And mostly that's in our old crooked democratic cities.
	I'm sorry to get political about it, but it is political.
	It is.
	The crooked old cities of America have continued a form of servitude that isn't quite slavery, but it's dependency.
	Enforced, created dependency.
	And that's the major thing holding back the progress at even a faster pace for African Americans and other minorities, but African Americans in particular in the United States.
	You fix that and boy, then the whole ship is going to rise.
	You continue it the way it is in those cities, in those crooked old cities, then you're just going to go into another generation of People who are not getting from government what they're entitled to.
	And what they're entitled to is not a living.
	It's not special privileges.
	It's a safe community.
	It's an educational system that exists to educate children rather than to either protect the workers in the system or to propagate an alien philosophy, Marxism.
	We don't teach history any longer.
	We teach critical theory, and then we teach critical theory and apply it to race, history.
	Therefore, we produce very, very poorly educated young people.
	They are consistently falling further down, further down, further down.
	And hopefully now, taking this crutch away, we're gonna force doing the things that are necessary.
	And if they're done, there's no reason why this can't be over with much quicker than you think.
	So, the decision is really simple to explain.
	Justice Roberts held that If you give someone extra points for the color of their skin and you vary the admission from merit to the color of someone's skin, you violated the Constitution of the United States.
	You know, it's no different than the more popular description of it By Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., a person should be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin.
	For admission to law school or college, someone should be judged by their academic credentials and ability to be able to handle the rigors of a college or law school education.
	And the stronger the merits, the higher up the list.
	The weaker the merits, further down the list.
	And then that reverberates all into the educational system.
	And the whole educational system then becomes based on merit right from the very beginning so that you can score well on either the tests or the exams or the other criteria that provide for admission.
	And at a very young age, You get used to a meritocracy in which black people, when they are allowed to fairly and equally compete, do just as well as white people, just as well as brown people, just as well as yellow people.
	I know there are these studies that certain races have higher IQ.
	Garbage.
	I've never seen any proof of that, that one race or another is inherently brighter, more honest, more decent, more wonderful than any other.
	It's a question of what they were exposed to and what they were taught.
	How they were brought up and what works and what doesn't work.
	And the sooner we get back to that, the sooner and the faster we're going to have a highly productive and an America based on relationships that are very honest.
	So Harvard was found to discriminate against Asian Americans, actually.
	and the University of North Carolina to have discriminated against both Asian and white Americans in the way in which they admitted people to school by giving additional preference based just on the color of your skin to African American students and the practice was reversed.
	Justice Sotomayor wrote the dissenting opinion and it was a typical defense of affirmative action as a necessary remedy for prior discrimination that without any real description of How does this endless circle end?
	When does it stop?
	And how do you really justify curing an evil by applying the evil?
	Except under different circumstances.
	And practically, what have the results been?
	And the results have been horrendous.
	They haven't gotten us anyplace.
	Probably one of the sidelights to it that has no academic value except just a little bit of indication of what a complete uneducated and silly person she is.
	AOC, the left-wing communist, I don't even know if she knows what a communist is, silly representative from New York, who really shouldn't be commenting on things she doesn't understand, said that if SCOTUS was serious, meaning the Supreme Court, was serious about their ludicrous Columbine claims, they would have abolished legacy admissions, a.k.a.
	affirmative action for the privileged.
	Legacy admissions, which exist in about, they say, 40% of the schools, at Harvard is maybe one of the worst, mean that you get a preference if your parent or parents or grandparents, I guess, went to Harvard.
	I guess in a more, in a more corrupt kind of way, like if they built a dormitory or a big hall or whatever that used to be the, you know, then you don't just get, you don't just get preference.
	To give you the whole school.
	But in any event, she said that whites were disproportionately benefited by legacy admissions.
	Turns out that the legacy admissions to Harvard are 70% white.
	70% white?
	Wow!
	AOC, you got us, babes!
	Sorry, I didn't mean that.
	She's probably gonna sue me for the corner.
	I didn't mean to say that.
	They're just being, you know, silly.
	So let me be serious now.
	The reason I was being somewhat sarcastic about that is, hey, moron, the population is 71% white.
	So they're actually being, they're off by like 1%.
	70% of the legacy admissions at Harvard are white.
	71% of the population is white.
	And where in the Constitution is there a protection against being discriminated against because somebody's a relative of somebody else?
	That's a circumstance of life.
	We could legislate about that.
	But we all have to face that.
	Remember the Godfather?
	The font of all terrible things?
	I think it's in Godfather 2, young Vito Corleone gets thrown out of his job because the guy is required to hire a relative of Don Ciccio.
	And young Vito shows how he's going to succeed by accepting it.
	I understand.
	He's a relative.
	I understand.
	No problem.
	And he just overcomes it.
	Second thing that's ridiculous is it shows that she is a completely uneducated human being.
	The Supreme Court can't just out of the blue decide that legacy admissions are discriminatory.
	And there's no case in front of them.
	This is a case about racial discrimination, not about legacy admissions.
	Does she have even, even a child's understanding of how the Supreme Court works?
	No.
	So they're supposed to, that's, I mean, this is like, um, she probably watches those shows, those, um, you know, Judge Judy shows on, on TV, like in the middle of, in the middle of this, um, in the middle of this, um, Oh, let's pick one of the conservative judges.
	Let's say Justice Gorsuch says, you know, I was thinking those legacy admissions are really bad.
	Hey, ladies and gentlemen of the court, why don't we just declare them discriminatory?
	What do you think?
	No argument, no case, no controversy, no parties here to argue either side of it.
	No facts.
	Let's just do it because AOC thinks that they're bad.
	Do you know how little she adds to the public and how much she adds to public ignorance?
	It's really just disgraceful.
	But in any event, the whole issue of legacy admissions is a good issue.
	And had she done it the way, for example, a highly intelligent person did it, she would have gotten a good hearing on it.
	And that's Senator Scott.
	Who said that he thinks the whole policy of legacy admissions now should be reviewed and looked at and probably done away with if you really want to be a meritocracy.
	I don't know that there would be a legal requirement to do it, but many things are done for policy reasons without a legal requirement.
	Would it make sense to do away with legacy admissions?
	Yeah, probably.
	And there are probably going to be people that disagree with that.
	But to say that the Supreme Court should have done it, and that's the reason not to do away with affirmative action, really just indicates that we've got a lightweight in a heavyweights arena, namely the Supreme Court.
	So we've got a lot of Got a lot of Biden stuff to unwrap right now.
	Someone tonight, I went to a garden party in Manchester, New Hampshire, which is the typical kind of setting for a candidate.
	This was really just friends of a good friend of mine and Dr. Maria's, who is the single best cook in Manchester.
	Or maybe anywhere.
	She's been in the real estate business.
	She's been in the restaurant business.
	She's a very, very accomplished American of Greek ancestry.
	But a fabulous cook, Italian, Greek, whatever.
	And has many, many friends and has given many political parties.
	She leans Conservative.
	Was a supporter of President Trump's.
	Has supported moderate Democrats also.
	People here in, and of course if you go to a garden party here in New Hampshire at this time of year, even though this was not for a specific candidate, that's all you talk about.
	I'm telling you, these people, this is like a You come and live here for two years and you become an expert on politics, so you're just anti-social.
	And they really follow it very, very carefully.
	So I'll bring you a little intelligence back from probably a plurality of people were probably Trump supporters, but not uniformly.
	And not all, not all Republican.
	The feeling was that there's something wrong with DeSantis.
	Now, I don't mean something wrong like illness or mental illness or he's a bad guy.
	I mean something wrong with his style, with his ability to relate to people.
	That's the better way to put it.
	Very critical here because this is one-on-one politics.
	And even when it isn't one-on-one politics, it's one-on-one politics.
	In other words, by word of mouth.
	So Trump will go have a garden party and it'll be like having 10 because it'll get all around.
	Oh, he was terrific.
	He was great.
	He was normal.
	Or I can remember when I ran here and we would get the feedback on Romney's garden.
	He's a stiff.
	He can't relate to people.
	He doesn't seem to like to shake hands.
	All these little things come up, even though, you know, the main thing are their policies.
	Because it's so intimate, they pick up the human qualities here.
	So they think that, I think he's been, the reason he's fallen in the polls here is, this is a terrible thing to say, but the more exposure, the more he goes down.
	I don't know what you do in that situation.
	The more you campaign, the more, They kind of get removed from you.
	Um, we look at a poll last night and we saw that Christie came in and they almost hit 10% right away.
	Now I don't think Christie is going to beat Trump here, but I wouldn't be surprised.
	Um, I wouldn't be surprised if Christie, well, I'm not going to predict yet that he comes in second because DeSantis has got like 50 times more money.
	But if anybody can challenge DeSantis for number two here, it would be Christy.
	Even though there's a lot about his candidacy that I don't like because it's so personal and so nasty.
	And I think it's not worthy of him.
	But in any event, I think the personality and the comfort with people, this is a perfect state.
	It's a perfect state for Trump.
	It's a perfect state for him.
	Perfect state for a charming politician.
	Or, I'm not going to say that Chris is charming.
	So the feeling that I got was they're going to take a fairly good look at him.
	There's also a kind of a subterranean view.
	People would like to look at Youngkin.
	Now he's not in the race.
	And I don't know what would happen if he got into it.
	There's a little bit more than just academic discussion of that.
	I think depending on what happens in the next two months, that's something that might happen, that he would get into the race.
	I think the way that would happen is Trump's lead plateaus.
	By that I mean it doesn't go up, it doesn't go down, it stays in the 50s.
	Maybe, maybe even the early 60s.
	It doesn't go beyond that.
	And DeSantis starts to fall.
	And somebody like Christie starts to, in other words, it shows that DeSantis is movable.
	Do you think the Santa's has peaked, Mayor?
	Very risky prediction.
	Thank you for your attention.
	Could be.
	It could be because he doesn't have the attributes that takes you to the next level.
	And you know I'm opposed to Christie's candidacy, right?
	You made that very clear.
	But I think he has the possibility of growing.
	Christie?
	Christie has what a good candidate in New Hampshire.
	And it doesn't seem like Ron has that.
	Now maybe Maybe he's a learner and he'll figure out how to charm the people in New Hampshire, but right now he's not doing it.
	And that's why he's pathetic like 16, 17, 18.
	And Trump is, you know, wobbling.
	And I'm surprised that Sununu is doing so poorly because he is in fact a popular governor.
	Uh, but I think I attribute that to the fact that they don't think he has a chance of becoming president.
	And therefore they think it's a vain, glorious, uh, uh, pursuit as opposed to a serious pursuit.
	I do think they like him here in, um, New Hampshire.
	But I think, I think they think this is, actually, what's, what's he running for?
	He's not going to, not going to beat Trump.
	He's not going to beat Biden.
	He's not going to, he's not going to get out of the primary and Why get in the way and let us concentrate on the people who have a chance of winning.
	Now, right behind me, I want to say a few words because we've been here a lot.
	I always like to educate you about America.
	That's a beautiful view of the city of Manchester.
	And I want you to notice the building in the middle.
	That used to be a mill.
	This city was a city that was filled with them, and there are, it seems to me, there are a couple of miles of those things.
	And they've done a very good job here, because I remember coming here years ago and a lot of these were broken down.
	They've done a very good job of making those quite, almost beautiful in the way in which they used them.
	In there you have offices, you have studios.
	University of New Hampshire campus here.
	University of Southern New Hampshire, I think, is here.
	There are some other universities have taken over these buildings because they make very good university buildings.
	Some of the best restaurants are there.
	And that's a picture of downtown Manchester.
	Quite pretty, right?
	That's what it looks like.
	Now I'm going to show you something else.
	That's the home of John H. Stark.
	That's his homestead.
	It's the oldest building in Manchester.
	It was built in 1736.
	John Stark was a Revolutionary War general hero, and he is accredited with the state motto.
	I don't love it.
	Live free or die!
	They're pretty serious during the Revolutionary War.
	You think we're that serious?
	That's John Stark, and that home you can go look at if you come here to New Hampshire.
	There are a lot of other things you can do, but I just thought you might like to see that.
	So why don't we take a short break, and when we come back, you get ready to Give us some calls and we'll get ready to talk to you a bit about where this whole investigation of Biden, the investigation that the Justice Department desperately doesn't want to do, but may be forced to do, or put in jail.
	We'll be back very shortly.
	Faith and family, freedom and finance, Four things that we would do anything to protect.
	I trust the team at Kirk Elliott PhD Private Advisors with providing the advice and sound strategies to take advantage of the inflationary pressures, the high interest rates, and the international challenges we face today.
	The Kirk Elliott team, with over 29 years of experience, shares our values and believes in people over profit.
	They can help you protect your finances from the big government policies that are out of our control.
	So what's in our control?
	The decision to act or not to act is within our control.
	I encourage you to act.
	Call Kirk Elliott, Ph.D.
	Private Advisors today.
	Start working with a team that will help you protect your retirement assets with gold and silver while sharing your desire to protect your faith, family, and freedom.
	Call them today, 720-605-3900.
	That's 720-605-3900.
	And tell them Rudy sent you.
	0 5 3 9 0 0 7 2 0 6 0 5 3 9 0 0 and tell them Rudy sent you or simply fill out a request
	for a free consultation at Kirk Elliott PhD dot com slash Rudy.
	And I still have to give half my salary back.
	I have to give half my salary to my father.
	So, first, you see there.
	Big achievement last night for a young pitcher.
	Domingo.
	Domingo is a Dominican, pitching for the Yankees now for about five or six years.
	He is a guy that started with great, great promise.
	You know, one of those really, really, remember Domingo German's first season, he was really unhittable, which he turned out to be last night.
	And then he had two things happen.
	Number one, he got into trouble with allegations.
	And I think, I think they went beyond allegations.
	I think he either, Had probation or whatever for domestic violence.
	And then when he made his comeback, he got, he was pitching well, maybe even made an all-star team.
	And then he, he got injured.
	And then this year he's been up and down and he just had like two very bad starts.
	And I love this column because I think this is old fashioned.
	This is old fashioned.
	Sports reporting by a fabulous sports reporter.
	If you're in New York, you know who he is for sure.
	Mike Vaccaro.
	This is like the kind of writing I'm not sure we're going to have in the future, you know, because these guys live with the club and they know much about baseball as their manager.
	Baseball alone gives this to you.
	Isn't that a beautiful opening?
	Baseball alone gives this to you.
	Only baseball allows this to happen.
	Baseball is where a pitcher named Domingo German can allow 15 earned runs in his last two starts.
	15 earned runs across just five and one-third innings.
	In other words, he was getting clobbered and then stride to a pitcher's mound in Oakland, California, six days later, three outs away from perfection.
	And he uses that as an introduction to describing the drama of the next three batters.
	The last one, the last one being a one that he took to a three, three balls and one strike count.
	Which means if he makes a mistake on the pitch, the perfect game is over.
	But instead, the batter swung at it, hit a very hard shot to Donaldson at third, who scooped it up, made a beautiful throw to first.
	And Domingo Germán goes into the history books.
	One of only 25, 24 pitchers.
	To have ever pitched a perfect game in the hundred and plus years of baseball.
	Only one of four Yankees in 133 years of baseball.
	The first Yankee to pitch a perfect game on the road.
	The other three, all great pitchers.
	Don Larson, who did it in the World Series.
	Only one to do it in the World Series.
	In 56 against the Brooklyn Dodgers.
	David Wells and David Cohn, who did it when I was mayor of New York City.
	And I gave them both the key to the city and I was present for David Collins.
	And enjoyed those two really very, very much.
	And those were all at Yankee Stadium and this was on the road in Oakland, California.
	And 99 pitches, 27 batters up and down.
	And this is what a scorecard looks like.
	I'll show it to you here.
	This is what a scorecard looks like when you pitch the perfect game.
	Look at all the zeros.
	See all those zeros?
	I was a catcher, so I love this stuff.
	Look at that.
	Look at that.
	Look at all those zeros.
	No runs.
	No hits.
	It's a little unfair.
	The perfect game thing is a little unfair because it doesn't have to do with the pitcher.
	There are no errors.
	Kind of shows you what a complete team you got, though.
	There was one, I wouldn't say superb, there was one play that had it not been made, it would not have been an error.
	Because it was a hard play to make, and that was the first baseman, Rizzo, who had to make a really tough grab.
	It was a diving play.
	That could have gotten through and it would not, and that would have been listed as a hit.
	Not an, I don't think it had been listed as, well, I think it had been listed as a hit, not an error.
	That would have broken up both the perfect game and it would have broken up the, um, the, the no hitter at the same time.
	So, uh, the New York times has now, uh, confirmed independently that the United States attorney in California refused to bring charges against Hunter Biden, as the IRS agent testified and explained, which appears to contradict the testimony under oath of the Attorney General, who said that he had the authority to bring these charges anywhere that he wanted.
	But he had the same authority as a special prosecutor, if not more.
	So, I mean, this is... I'll tell you why this is significant.
	First of all, this is a Biden insider.
	Number two, it's the Times corroborating it.
	Except, can I point out to you, it was in the 21st paragraph of the story.
	That's a significant, really significant thing.
	It's significant in light of the fact that this was a very, very strong case against Hunter Biden.
	It was a much more serious case than the chicken garbage they're using.
	It's beginning to fill in the corroboration that will make the whistleblower Gary Shapley, just completely incredible.
	And there are, supposedly lined up in the wings, five witnesses, government, I think, combination of IRS agents and FBI agents, who corroborate What he basically has said, and let's review what he said, because what he said, I don't know, you tell me a cover-up that has been worse than this.
	Certainly not Watergate.
	According to Shapley, on two occasions, they wanted to, the IRS agents, and I guess the FBI agents involved, wanted to conduct searches of two different residences, of Hunter, one of which is really used by Joe, and it's the one where he had all the classified documents out, even though Hunter is a national security risk, particularly with regard to China.
	He was in business at the time with the spy chief of China.
	They were turned down for doing search warrants in both of those places, according to the agent.
	They were not allowed to ask questions about Joe Biden or the big guy.
	They were not allowed to ask questions about any other member of the Biden family, which would knock together a case that would move beyond Hunter, if Hunter at all.
	And of course, this flies in the face of unbelievable amount of evidence on the hard drive that Joe was sharing in the money, including the son saying it.
	I give half the money to Pop for 30 years.
	I mean, you say you're not going to ask questions about the guy who seems to be the top of the pyramid.
	Not guesswork, but evidence from texts, like the one I just mentioned to you, shows that this was a corrupt, fixed investigation.
	But, you know, you don't get any of that in The Times.
	Mr. Comer, the chairman of the committee that's really seems to be feeding us one of these a day so that we don't get overloaded and can't follow it.
	And I kind of like the way he's doing it, although people are impatient to get all of it.
	I do think you have to spend time absorbing this.
	He estimated on John Castamettini's show, Cats, and Cosby show, which I'm on quite a bit.
	Of course, they come on two hours after me on WABC radio.
	Close to both of them.
	But he said that he believes that the family, it looks like the family got about $40 million from presidential policy decisions.
	These are decisions that Joe made while he was president.
	Well, four for sure.
	Um, he said, we cannot come to any other conclusion as to why these decisions were made other than the fact that this president is compromised.
	Um, the oversight committee chairman explained that as recently as in the last five days, his panel has obtained banking statements and suspicious activity reports that show more bank accounts, more shell companies, and more Biden's being involved than the family's overseas influence peddling scheme.
	Remember, 170 suspicious activity reports were filed concerning the Bidens and their international money transactions.
	I don't know if there's any organized criminal that has anywhere near that or, you know, financial fraudster or whatever.
	So, What's the Justice Department doing about this?
	They're prosecuting Donald Trump for what appears to be nothing in comparison to, well, it's actually two United States attorneys that refuse to indict him.
	Martin Estrada is the one about which there's the corroboration.
	And the other is Matthew Graves, the U.S.
	Attorney in the District of Columbia.
	The one that is very, who is presiding over that unbelievable violation of human rights called the J6 investigation.
	Whether they did or didn't do what they said, holding these people in conditions of confinement that are more like third world and just long periods of time with no trial.
	I don't know how the hell they're getting away with it except people have drunk the Kool-Aid and we got a whole District of Columbia, including even the court system that seems to be so involved in So involved in Trump derangement syndrome that they can't act even vaguely like judges in a country with a constitution.
	And where these people are entitled to the same rights as everyone else.
	After all, we give those rights to terrorists.
	And we have to acknowledge that tremendous exaggerations were perpetrated with regard to January 6th.
	First of all, that people were killed.
	by the insurrectionists.
	Insurrections didn't kill anybody.
	The Capitol Police killed someone.
	And that was Ashley Babbitt, and they refused to investigate that.
	And boy, it was an extraordinarily suspicious homicide.
	Looks like a homicide.
	We've been into that.
	Then we have this unbelievable, unbelievable text Where Hunter is saying that his father is right next to him, and he wants $10 million.
	He doesn't want $5 million.
	He wants $10 million.
	He says, I can make $5 million in salary in any law firm in America.
	That's not true, actually.
	Who the hell is going to pay him $5 million?
	The Bidens are the best I know at doing exactly what the chairman wants from this partnership.
	The chairman was a major crook at the highest level of the Chinese Communist Party.
	The chairman is now missing.
	The best guess is he's sitting in the bottom of the Yangtze River and at times was described as the richest And one of the most powerful men in China, extremely close to the regime, who specialized in using his businesses as a front to assist the expansion of the Red Chinese.
	There's a whole article about that in the Times that explains how his purpose was to infiltrate.
	The Bidens are the best I know at doing exactly what the chairman wants from this partnership.
	What he wanted was the expansion of the influence of red China in the United States, contrary to the best interests of the United States.
	And that's what they're paying.
	This deal was a three year, $30 million deal.
	about which Joe is, I mean, Hunter is now shaking them down for the first 10 million and they seem to want to give him five.
	So, he says that Joe was right next to him during this conversation.
	Joe, yesterday, very angrily seemed to say he wasn't.
	Now, here's the best we can do, and possibly better.
	There are photographs of Hunter that day Uh, in the automobile right in front of the house.
	He was in the house that day.
	Joe was in the house that day.
	Now the question is how good is the metadata?
	Remember, uh, uh, uh, remember 1,000 mules or 2,000 mules and how they tracked?
	I don't know.
	You get Joe's phone, you get his phone.
	Get the time of this?
	Might be able to put them right next to each other.
	When he's shaking people down.
	What do you think?
	Think they'll be allowed to try that?
	I sure would try that.
	And I sure would think that anybody who stopped me was involved in fixing the case.
	And we can definitively figure out, maybe, maybe, if they had their phones with them, were they next to each other when he was shaking these people down and saying, You know, if basically, if you don't do this, my father and I are going to chase you to the end of the earth.
	Now, who's he dealing with?
	He's dealing with a crooked Chinese communist.
	This is the kind of stuff organized crime does.
	This kind of a conversation.
	Right?
	Well then, so let's see what happened as a result of it.
	The following day, he got $100,000 from CEFC, which is the chairman's company, the multi-billion dollar company.
	And five days later, $5 million was moved to Hudson West 3, which was opened by Hunter Biden and Gong Wen Dong.
	And I have seen myself the distributions from that account, which was basically wiped out and spread around the Biden family.
	So there you go.
	Another 5 million from the red Chinese to now the first family of the United States.
	Think they're compromised?
	If you don't, please let me get you into some kind of remedial reading or thinking course.
	So let's see where this goes, but it's time for a public hearing.
	It's time for, if they're ready, and time means within the next couple weeks, to vindicate the attacks on Shalhi and show that he's telling the truth.
	I know he's telling the truth because I have my own evidence, which could have revealed this two years ago, but they didn't want to.
	What they wanted to do was cover it up and do the best they could to destroy me so that they could keep their 40 million.
	What do you think?
	Think they're going to get away with it?
	I mentioned before that there's a case in New York that maybe we should spend a moment on because it has gotten national attention.
	And it's the one involving the Marine who, Mr. Penny, who was on a subway and sitting there minding his own business.
	And this guy, basically career criminal, Uh, gets on the train and is yelling and screaming and throwing garbage at people and telling people that he's gonna kill them and that he doesn't mind if he dies.
	And, um, and there are witnesses who say they were in fear of their life.
	Mr. Mr. Penny, he came into Mr. Penny's car.
	He did the same thing.
	Mr. Penny came to the conclusion that he was about to really kill someone or harm someone, as did other passengers, apparently.
	And that happened.
	I think the proximate cause, the precipitating cause was the guy took his jacket off, you know, like you do when you're going to start a fight, took his jacket off and threw it at someone.
	And at that point, I think Penny decided he better move now before somebody gets seriously hurt or killed, which he does.
	And he takes the guy down and he's got him in a hold.
	And they call it immediately a choke hold.
	I don't know.
	I'd really want to study that tape a lot more of the tape than I've been able to see, because the part that I've seen, it seems to me like the elbows up here.
	And I don't see it as the classic chokehold.
	It may be.
	But the real question is, was Penny justified in doing that for his own safety and the safety of the other people when the man basically said he was going to kill people and was acting like he would kill people?
	Now, how does that compare with this case that I'm going to Show you right now.
	There, there, uh, where you can see, uh, uh, Jordan Williams, who's 20 years old on the right side, very nice smile.
	Seems like a very nice young man, right?
	All for all, um, for all, by all accounts, he is a very nice man, a very nice young man who has not first let's begin with never been in trouble.
	Um, um, Not a history of violence or anything like that.
	He was on the J train in Brooklyn.
	And there's video footage of this that is pretty conclusive.
	Again, a career criminal who does stuff like this and has been arrested for it over and over again.
	named Quadrago, is gets on the train, goes up to and is, you know, is basically threatening other people.
	And he goes past William's girlfriend, and he snaps at her, want to F. Want to F!
	So there you are with your very nice young girlfriend, minding your own business, and this, as I said, career criminal comes up and says, do you want to F to this young girl?
	Williams then shoves Quadrigo when he refused to back off.
	He just stood there, like that's what he wanted to do.
	So Williams shoves him, And the ex-con, he was an ex-con, attacks them both, goes at both of them.
	And Williams grabs him and they get into a wrestling match.
	And all of a sudden, in the middle of that melee, you can see blood and Williams has pulled out a knife and turns out killed him.
	A grand jury in Brooklyn yesterday decided no case, self-defense, no case either with regard to manslaughter, negligent homicide, even possession of a dangerous weapon.
	In the case of Penny, they indicted him for manslaughter and he's facing like 30 years in jail.
	So what are the differences in these two cases?
	The main difference that is pointed to is in the case of Williams, there was actual physical contact and the fight had begun.
	In the case of Penny, he was anticipating that something would happen and therefore he acted too quickly.
	Although in this particular case, a knife did come out.
	And it's hard to know exactly who started what and how it all happened.
	And although I think both of them should have been given an award for protecting people on the train.
	But I wonder why Penny is being treated so much more harshly.
	And he shouldn't be.
	Penny, it looks to me like when you, even the parts of the tape you're able to see and the little bit of the testimony that gets leaked, particularly if Penny is going to be supported by the people on the train who say that they were in fear for their lives, then Penny had, you know, had the same reaction they had and it was reasonable.
	Then he'll be acquitted or should be acquitted.
	The case should even be dismissed.
	But this gives you an idea of what we're facing here in New York, where people have to defend themselves because our... I think Adams has gone a little batty.
	I mean, a whole bunch of weird statements lately.
	A couple days ago, he told us that God told him 30 years ago that he should run for mayor.
	I'm a little, you know, perturbed about this because it was the year I was running for mayor that he was told that he should run for mayor, but 30 years later.
	I just, you know, having run for mayor and having known some mayors like Kotchin, I don't remember him ever telling me that God told him to run or me.
	And then he gets into this dispute.
	And he tells people something like he's like Kunta Kinte.
	No, he's not.
	And then he's another thing.
	He gets really upset with this woman who was angry at him for something that people get angry at mayors for.
	I don't even remember what it is.
	But he started saying, you know, you don't don't treat me that way.
	It's like I'm on the plantation.
	Something's going on.
	I don't remember him being like this and with Biden going bat crazy in Washington and the mayor going woohoo here in New York.
	I don't know.
	We got the same person around.
	Now, the mayor should be happy because he's had a win and I'm not doing this sarcastically.
	He seems to be winning his war on rats.
	The rat sightings are down 26%.
	Because they have initiated and completed step one, which is they've banned businesses and homeowners from putting out trash before 8pm at night.
	And now they're going to begin the use of much more secure storage containers, which should get us another reduction.
	So that's a plus.
	For Mayor Adams.
	And I'm serious, because rats are a problem, and they spread disease, and they're also frightening for some reason.
	People are extraordinarily frightened by them, more than other animals.
	Although I don't know You know, you don't really hear of too many rat attacks on people.
	You have on children a little bit.
	But I mean, it's certainly a good thing to try to reduce the rat.
	I did.
	I had a rat czar, Joe Loda.
	He used to keep a big chart of all the rats that he got rid of.
	And he's really proud when he had a good rat elimination day.
	Now, on the other end of it, it seems like the mayor's program to deal with homelessness has become a complete bust.
	Just three of the more than 2,000 people swept up in the Adams homeless encampment crackdown landed in permanent housing.
	And 95% didn't even go to a shelter.
	And then the percentages here are, the percentages here are absurd.
	I ran a program like this.
	I mean, he's sort of acting as if this is Invented by him, this is precisely what I did and even wrote about it five years ago, urging Mayor de Blasio to do it, which is, I basically said, you're not sleeping on the streets, sorry.
	We have beds for that, we have, you know, that's what, I mean, if you all slept on the streets, poor Mr. Pillows would go out of business, right?
	I mean, this is what we, we kind of moved inside a couple centuries ago.
	We stopped urinating and defecating on the streets because of the plague.
	And we're going back to that.
	So I said, no, I'm sorry.
	Streets are not for sleeping.
	So if you want to sleep on the street, you're going to have to come with me to a shelter.
	We'll evaluate you because don't get insulted.
	There's probably something wrong with you.
	And we're going to deal with it instead of ignore it because we love you.
	We don't just let you waste your life away on the streets, because we're not a bunch of liberal phonies.
	But if you don't come with me, I can't arrest you.
	You don't have the authority to do that.
	It's not a crime, but it is a choice.
	You're just going to have to pick up and get out of here.
	And then they would move one place and the cops would go after them.
	Eventually, we persuaded most of them To come to this shelter, not five percent.
	I don't know what they're doing.
	I don't know what they're doing wrong, but it doesn't have to be that way.
	Now you want to know what's wrong with the city and why we consistently elect these completely incompetent, in some cases crooked, in some cases communist and socialist and people and vote Democ like it's Pavlovian and We just had a primary.
	Less than 200,000 voters showed up.
	We're a city of 8 million people.
	This was a Democratic primary.
	Let's take the Bronx, for example.
	There are 535,955 registered Democrats in the Bronx, of which 28,472 showed up to vote.
	That's 5.3%.
	255 registered Democrats in the Bronx, of which 28,472 showed up to vote.
	That's 5.3%.
	And then you get a city like this because people don't vote.
	They don't get involved.
	They don't connect the horrible conditions of their lives with the incompetent and at times crooked politicians that get into office when people don't get involved.
	So, let's see what we have as far as comments.
	They have infiltrated our congressional government.
	That's Tom Parker.
	I was homeless for a long time and never went into a shelter.
	Is a Trump RFK ticket possible?
	We were just discussing that, Ted.
	Let's see what Ted thinks about that.
	It's interesting, isn't it, Mayor, because we saw today RFK Jr.
	come out against the Supreme Court.
	Ruling with I guess you could say the ruling was against affirmative action, right?
	You could say it was for a merit-based Approach to college Admissions if anything, sorry, we won't go down we could talk about that all day.
	But yeah, so it's interesting people were high on RFK Do you think that a decision like that are coming out on?
	I don't want to call it divisive.
	Coming out so strongly on a big issue like this, what does that say about RFK?
	I'll tell you what it says.
	It says that it's an unrealistic ticket.
	RFK is a Democrat.
	Trump is a Republican.
	There are just too many differences, even though there are some extremely powerful agreements.
	even though there are some extremely powerful agreements.
	So I could see, like his uncle did.
	His uncle had Republicans, several Republicans, in very key positions in his administration, including a very critical position, since he wanted to do tax reductions and turn the economy around.
	He had a Republican as Secretary of Treasury.
	John Kennedy did.
	Wow.
	And he had other Republicans, too, in his administration.
	I'm trying to remember who it was, but I mean, the Secretary of the Treasury was the biggest one, and that's a big one, particularly if the economy is one of your big issues.
	I mean, there is an interesting quote from him that I think I can find and play for you, and it'll give you an idea.
	It'll give you an idea of how, here we are, give you an idea of how there are some real similarities
	that overlap here.
	And no, that's the calls.
	Let's see.
	We'll just go down one more.
	Here we are.
	Here we are.
	Just hold on, RFK, RFK.
	Here, this is RFK, and he's explaining why Democrats should vote against Biden.
	And I don't know, sounds a little like why I left the Democrats.
	It sounds a little like why I left the Democratic Party.
	I mean, I'm running because I feel like my party has lost its way.
	That the values that my uncle represented, my father represented when they were Democrats, have been neglected, let's say.
	And I want to try to bring the Democratic Party back to those values.
	Focused on the middle class in this country, focused on labor, on racial, on the well-being of minorities in this country, focused on the environment, particularly on civil liberties and freedom of speech, which the party seems to have forgotten about.
	And the party traditionally was Annie Ward as well, my uncle.
	President Kennedy was asked by his best friend why he wandered on his habitat, on his gravestone, and he said he kept the peace.
	He said the principal job of an American president is to keep the country out of war.
	And the Democratic Party has represented those views since its inception.
	And I think, you know, particularly what we're doing now in Ukraine is a departure You know, I'm very, very sympathetic to the Ukrainian people, and I'm not sympathetic to Putin who invaded Ukraine brutally and illegally and unnecessarily.
	We have many, many opportunities to settle this war peacefully.
	I mean, I'm running because I feel like it.
	You know, the interesting thing here is that the only other candidate That I can think of who's in favor of making peace in Ukraine is Donald Trump.
	So here we have an interesting juxtaposition, right?
	We have the two of them probably in complete disagreement on affirmative action.
	As probably most Democrats and Republicans disagree on affirmative action.
	Although there are a fair number of Democrats that have come to the conclusion that affirmative action has not only outlived its usefulness, but has turned, has really gone so far that it's destroyed its original purpose.
	It's now holding black people back from competing really effectively.
	So I would cite Alan Dershowitz, who has actually been against affirmative action from the very beginning and wrote an excellent piece in Newsmax Magazine that you may want to take a look at.
	But now listen to him, again, Robert Kennedy Jr.
	on the subject of Trump.
	him again Robert Kennedy, Robert Kennedy Jr. on the subject of Trump. This is
	really very interesting and I want to know what you think of this Ted.
	I'm proud that President Trump likes me, even though I don't agree with him on most of his issues, because I don't want to alienate people.
	I want to bring people together.
	I'm proud that all these people like me and that I have independent supporters and Democratic supporters and that I'm able to bring a lot of people.
	Every Democrat says, I want to end the polarization.
	But how do you do that without talking to people who don't agree with you?
	How do you do that without appealing to people?
	My purpose is to find the issues and values that we have in common, other than, you know, focus on the issues and the personalities that keep us all apart.
	Wow!
	Now you know who that reminds me of?
	Reminds me of my boss, Ronald Reagan.
	My 80% Friend is not my 20% enemy.
	20% enemy. His basic view was that you should be able to talk and you should be able to
	discuss with members of the other party. And I thought that very beginning of that, I'm
	I'm proud of the fact that Trump likes me.
	I don't know.
	Aren't you proud of the fact when people like you?
	I mean, they've made Trump into some kind of a, I mean, whatever else you say about Robert Kennedy Jr.
	Seems like he's a normal person.
	I like that he likes me.
	I think people that disagree with him should talk to each other.
	What are we going to do?
	I mean, you know, we're civilized human beings.
	We're not going to have a fist fight.
	Putting you on now.
	I enjoy debates with people that have a different viewpoint.
	And sometimes, we all learn from that.
	Gee, we keep talking to the same people and agreeing with each other.
	We don't learn anything.
	That's how I became so friendly with Dershowitz when we were on the opposite side.
	We're still on the opposite side of a lot of things.
	All right, and let's go to Keith in Fairfax County, Virginia.
	Keith, can you hear us?
	I can't hear you.
	I'm trying to hear you.
	Keith, are you with us still?
	No, I mean I was using the other toothpaste.
	I'm running out of that.
	The number is 1-646-573-5177.
	Hello?
	I'm doing that clandestinely.
	John, are you there?
	Okay, John, I'm putting you on.
	Let's go to John.
	John, you're on with the mayor.
	John, are you there?
	Yes, I am.
	Hi, John, how are you?
	Mr. Giuliani, it is my honor to talk to you.
	Well, thank you, John.
	It's my honor to talk to you.
	What would you like to talk about?
	Well, you are in New Hampshire.
	Yes, sir.
	I was born and raised in a city outside of Boston and that entire area.
	I was absorbed in the history of this country.
	Of course, yeah.
	The city?
	Well, the city of Boston.
	They chased the British out before the war even started.
	And they never returned until after the war was over.
	Those Bostonians are a force to be reckoned with still.
	Well, I remember a couple of tough games with the Red Sox.
	Wow.
	They just swept us.
	Oh my God.
	They just swept us, those sons of guns.
	You know, I felt bad for a lady rooting for the wrong team in a football game with the Patriots.
	She was from Florida, and she sat on the wrong side of the stadium.
	They told her to be quiet, and she kept rooting for her team.
	She needed fire rescue after, which was wrong.
	Of course it was wrong.
	These people are so obsessed with being American.
	So why, so why is it so damn liberal?
	Boston and Massachusetts, like my state, New York, I mean, or California, they really make stupid decisions.
	The governor, the previous governor of Boston, he seems like he was there forever.
	Charlie Baker.
	Oh, Charlie Baker, the Republican, the governor of Massachusetts, right?
	It's funny.
	He was a Republican, but at election time, he started to kind of be a Democrat and then he got elected and he went back to being a Republican.
	Yeah, I mean, it is a strange set of politics.
	You've had a lot of Republican governors in Massachusetts.
	I knew them all.
	Weld and Cellucci, who's passed away, a great man.
	Baker.
	So if you go back over the last, like, 25, 30 years, probably half the time you had a Republican governor, even though the state's congressional delegation is, you know, could be very comfortable in China.
	It doesn't make sense.
	You know, that is the bluest state.
	Yeah, it doesn't make sense. And then a lot of those people moved to New Hampshire,
	which used to be very Republican.
	And now it's back and forth.
	Although right now, right now there's a Republican governor and I think the legislature is Republican in New Hampshire, but the federal representatives are all Democrats.
	Interesting as to who's going to win the primary here, because Biden is not participating.
	The Democrats have turned their back on New Hampshire and no longer wanted to be the first in the nation primary, largely because Biden has had his head kicked in here several times, including the last time.
	But, you know, people here generally are very, very discerning.
	And I think Biden has always been too dumb for them.
	And they would pick it up.
	People in New Hampshire would pick that up.
	These are very intelligent people.
	They absolutely would.
	And there are so many Democrats.
	I used to be a Democrat and then I got smart.
	Me too.
	I used to be a Democrat.
	I was in my 20s and changed, but still I was a Democrat and I understand the Democrats
	My goodness, there's no one that's worked with Democrats more than me.
	When I was mayor, my city council was 45 Democrats and six Republicans.
	So if I wanted to pass tax reduction or taking the mafia out of the full fish market and the sanitation business and all these very landmark pieces of legislation, I had to get along with the city council.
	But I was very, very blessed with a great speaker named Peter Vallone, and that helps a lot.
	Well, thank you.
	Thank you very, very much.
	And even though I'm a Yankee fan and there's that big rivalry with the Red Sox, I have a great deal of fondness for Boston, too.
	How can you not if you're an American patriot?
	Come on, you just walk down the streets in Boston and You get goosebumps, particularly as we get close to the 4th of July and reliving the, you know, fight for our independence.
	Someday they'll explain to me why these people vote for these.
	Uh, Ted?
	Well, Mayor, another busy night.
	We're well into soccer time.
	So we, It will sign off and invite people to become a super follower on Twitter.
	We're starting to post a lot more content there that you have access to if you're a subscriber.
	It's just all right.
	Sorry, a super follower.
	It's just ten dollars a month.
	And we can you'll have access to all the special coverage and we will make sure.
	Including including inside.
	Inside information, I don't mean in a legal sense, but inside information in a political sense.
	That's right.
	About what's going on because we, you and I, get a lot of information that kind of passes, passes by.
	Passes by and we grab it out of the air and share it with your audience.
	So today, a very significant day.
	The Supreme Court finally does away with affirmative action.
	And maybe set the tone for how we can take the last steps in getting those inner cities of America, getting them on the right track, which is not dependency.
	It's not giveaway programs.
	It's not ridiculously silly indoctrination programs as a substitute for education.
	It's not having, you know, sessions with drag queens, it's learning one and one equals two, two and two equals four, you know, stuff like that.
	Or I'm learning how to read, and if you get a chance, read Timothy Dolan, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, to you and me.
	What is in Caesar?
	It's a very, very thoughtful article in the New York Post today.
	Today is the feast of St.
	Peter and Paul, which he reminds us of at the beginning.
	And says the founders of the church in Rome who died rather than betray their conscience.
	He goes on to list the basic war against the Catholic Church.
	That is being he doesn't put it this way because he has to stay out of politics is being conducted by the Democrat Party.
	Particularly.
	The Department of Health and Human Services is finalizing regulations that will force health care workers to perform gender transition procedures, even if they object for religious reasons, and possibly even abortions.
	A government inspector in Oklahoma has threatened to cut off a Catholic hospital
	from federal funds unless it extinguishes an open flame that happens to be the sanctuary lamp
	in the chapel next to the tabernacle with the holy Eucharist in it.
	They are pushing for the passage of the Equality Act, which would eliminate rights secured under
	the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which passed Congress unanimously during the Clinton
	administration.
	They even have a wave of bills now in states which would force priests to violate the seal of the confessional.
	So, there's a lot at stake here.
	And I will remind you, although I'm not sure the Cardinal would agree with me on this or not, this is my observation, not his.
	This is the work of the Communist Party.
	They've been after the Catholic Church from day one.
	It's their prime enemy.
	No, God is their prime enemy, but the Catholic Church is a very, very large institution.
	I guess really, in some ways, the most powerful religious institution in the world, in terms of just purely religious institution.
	So it would have to be a number one target if you wanted to go after God.
	And all of this is intended to get the Catholic Church.
	I think they believe they can bring down the Catholic Church They'll bring down Christianity.
	Now you look at China and China is equally vicious and homicidal toward Protestants and Catholics.
	It doesn't matter if you're Christian, you know, you're, you better do what they say or you're dead.
	So read the article.
	I think it'll, it'll give you, it'll give you a perspective on what's going on.
	And I'll give you a perspective on what it's connected to.
	And we'll discuss that tomorrow.
	So we'll be back tomorrow.
	I'll be on radio at three tomorrow, wabcradio.com.
	You can get it all over the world.
	Just like you can get this and we'll be back here at nine, eight o'clock tomorrow night, between eight and nine.
	And I don't know what you're watching me on.
	You may be watching me on Twitter or on YouTube or on getter right over here.
	So you guys are over here or you may be watching me on Facebook.
	Or on... Rumble!
	Rumble, rumble, rumble, rumble!
	But just tune in again tomorrow night.
	And if you miss it, you know, it's on there all night and you can watch it when you can't sleep.
	And maybe I'll keep you awake.
	Maybe I should put little lullabies in just so in case you watch me like at three in the morning or four in the morning, the ones that make sleep, you know, we'll think about that.
	We're thinking about all kinds of new things we're going to add as we get closer to the election, including political panel.
	And I'd love to get your advice on that.
	So go to RudyGiulianiCS.com, subscribe, and send me notes.
	Look at my podcast and send me notes.
	And then go to Twitter and subscribe.
	The first one doesn't cost any money.
	The second one is $10, but you're going to get plenty of information, particularly as we get closer and closer now to the election.
	So thank you.
	Thank you for listening.
	We really appreciate it.
	Thank you for calling and sending in your comments.
	They help a lot.
	And please say a prayer for our country and also a prayer of thanksgiving that God has put you here in America.
	God bless America.
	Our purpose to bring to bear the principle of common sense and rational discussion To the issues of our day.
	America was created at a time of great turmoil, tremendous disagreements, anger, hatred.
	It was a book written in 1776 that guided much of the discipline of thinking that brought to us the discovery of our freedoms, of our God-given freedoms.
	It was Thomas Paine's Common Sense, written in 1776, one of the first American bestsellers, in which Thomas Paine explained, by rational principles, the reason why these small colonies felt the necessity to separate from the Kingdom of Great Britain and the King of England.
	He explained their inherent desire for liberty, for freedom, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, The ability to select the people who govern them.
	And he explained it in ways that were understandable to all the people, not just the elite.
	Because the desire for freedom is universal.
	The desire for freedom adheres in the human mind and it is part of the human soul.
	This is exactly the time we should consult our history.
	Look at what we've done in the past.
	And see if we can't use it to help us now.
	We understand that our founders created the greatest country in the history of the world.
	The greatest democracy, the freest country.
	A country that has taken more people out of poverty than any country ever.
	All of us are so fortunate to be Americans.
	But a great deal of the reason for America's constant ability to self-improve is because we're able to reason.
	We're able to talk.
	We're able to analyze.
	We are able to apply our God-given common sense.

▲