Conversation 416-050

Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

Hi, how are you, sir?

Good to see you, how are you doing?

Except for the last captain.

And the first captain, you know.

We'll see you later, then.

Yeah.

Yeah, he's smoking.

You're a...

I'm a teen, so... Are you a... Oh, yes.

Oh, I can stop.

I'll leave it.

I wasn't impressed, Dr. Cook.

The cigarette smoke today was 95%.

That's what I thought it was.

But there's certainly biotoxic genetics and stuff.

That makes me feel that I actually wanted to fight this thing.

I thought something was going to happen.

And then I thought, well, I'm going to try this.

I'm going to try this.

I don't know

Yeah, I can have it.

When I say my idea, the sense of

Henry and Bill, the writers, they all thought that when you're one of the few in the press that you perhaps sort of saw how important it was for everybody to be able to talk about it, be able to listen, you know, and that's the history that they didn't realize.

that they would accept it.

It was a very important thing, and I do want to do that in a second.

But I don't want to touch on the chapter, because it's going to be announced shortly.

First, like I said, it's going to lead back to a little bit of history.

But I don't know if it's going to lead back to history.

But it might.

We should do that in the chapter.

When we got the first message, it showed a lot of it.

And so I submitted at that time the name.

They did not want to.

So when this thing came up.

Now,

And then, so that told us something about what they were going on as the nature of this office, as it is on this.

Jason's focus, I don't know if you can guess what I heard, was often a little arrogant, but I think it was British in this, because I've got a group of ambassadors, ambassadors, ambassadors, ambassadors, and a Democrat, et cetera, and a man who was a Democrat in the United States.

And that was when we were out shopping, so it was quite a bit of a change.

So, it also required them to send somebody to the department.

So when I had Harrison, he's a very popular passenger in the world.

He's a very popular passenger in Paris.

He's highly sophisticated.

I've heard of him since he was a kid.

He was in the Air Force.

He was the second man in the Air Force.

He was a very popular passenger in the world.

He was a very popular passenger in Paris.

We don't have here.

Representation here, representation.

What this means is that after all that they're saying,

but they did not send anybody here until we got the final spousal.

And now they've set it up.

And there's no office.

There's no ambassador.

There's no ambassador to let me make something.

And also, it's a business.

You know, it's a business.

You know, we never did it.

We should have done it.

That's the story.

Oh, not necessarily, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

.

I don't mean to suggest we're speaking together, but it does mean that there is a much bigger situation here.

It's much higher.

And if I could read it a little bit faster, I'd do it better.

I would be more suggestive, you know, maybe faster.

And this symbol is the purpose of the prayer.

Faster prayer.

He said, hey,

Uh, sure, I understand what you're talking about.

Sure.

Uh, let me go through this.

When I first talked about it, it was really, it was simple.

It was like you were talking to a chef.

That's why you're not sure.

It's like, for the domestic, it's like, I don't know what you're saying.

I've got to talk to him about it.

Right.

You can't tell me anything about it.

There's a third thing I'd like to know, and I still wouldn't, but I'm going to ask you about, you know, in fact, I'm answering now.

I would like to know if you'd tell me, well, I think we should talk to you on the vacate position and the handling position.

I think it's a good idea.

The handling position.

The second one is off.

This is pre-Christmas fun.

We can go to that lab.

I'd like to say that we want to take those labs.

Take those labs.

I've heard of them.

Make sure the rest of them shut down.

Let me guess.

All right.

Well, I want to get myself off the floor.

No one's going to pass it.

I want to say

all of us that makes this not just a foreign but it's basically uh

uh, crime, drugs, buzzards, people who are dealing in the, uh, in the New York Times, the government, uh, you know, I think, well, better, better transportation, such as, you know, a lot of the environment, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

And so, uh, the domestic, domestic questions are not that exciting.

I like, for example, the G.L.A.s.

I've known them for years, uh, all the years that I was vice president.

I think I know some of them.

We had a special interest in that great place.

But most of them always wanted to get back to what was happening.

Everybody wants to be a secretary of state.

Every columnist, every writer, if you want to be a secretary of state, you have to be a president.

The other way that I put that, which is probably the best way to do it, is to be a president.

I pulled it out at one time, and it was interesting.

And that creates a movement of paradox that a president, at the end of the day, may qualify

America's position, and with the awesome power of the present control, that in a state in that area, we can put automatic arms to destroy the world, or evade it, or leave it, effectively.

And that's not good.

I don't know.

uh... uh... uh... uh... uh... uh... uh... uh... uh...

I don't think they could change the record.

Okay.

That's over.

So the president's chapter is too important.

And we'll call this up for him.

But on the other hand, it's a good call.

So I think we should go back and start all over again.

In spite of all that

I'm not suggesting that the mathematicians are not important.

I'm simply suggesting that in the state of the mathematic video, it's not necessarily clear.

In the state of the modern video, it could be clear.

That's why I always put such emphasis on qualitative

That's why both parties in 1976 must first work together, must first work together, to require that their enemy is one nation, and trust the foreign policy community, their confidence in each other, to make the decision as well.

But in terms of, in terms of respect, in terms of their relationship, their lives, it's all in that tradition.

.

But later, definitely one of the people who are interested in it.

And also, if you want to look at people who can't be united, you know, I don't know, I don't understand where the domestic view is.

The domestic view of putting everybody in a place where there's a difference, where there's a divide, where there's a divide, where there's a division, and so on.

I don't even know what you're talking about.

I don't know what you are.

He had a great job.

He had an emergency domestically when they had a war.

It's rather sad in a way that there aren't great presidents.

I agree with you.

So, for example, how great a president would that be?

T.R.

was his name.

T.R.

was perhaps one exception.

He had a personality.

He never had a war.

He played an orderly scene.

I don't know if you've heard of him.

Wilson, I don't know if you've heard of him.

Wilson was your...

I heard a legacy from my students about what I'm going to do next year.

I'm probably going to do it the next year.

It's the next year's term.

Because the war, the war isn't going to get out of motion.

It's going to get out of motion.

It will.

But the question is, but the question is, but I've seen that thinking over and over again.

The effort of conversation is,

If you made that person out, you were going to send him out.

You were sending him out.

Uh, and that I do know quite well, say, because Leslie is our director.

But, as for yourself, can you tell me how, where did you have to get this?

Where did you get this from?

Well, yeah, the, uh...

I'm sorry about that.

I was referring to the board.

The board, you know.

I heard this big shock in the second half.

It was a version of every fifth week problem that she talked about.

What are we going to do about Ecuador's fisheries?

What are we going to do about the problems in South Alaska?

What are we going to do about the dangers in our town, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Now, I'm sorry.

I shut all that off.

It gets back to the .

I think in terms, for example,

I think all that was given away.

is the best way for the president to face the situation.

So that's why I make the point all the time in the investment field, what has happened here and what hasn't happened.

More than I realize that the office of the president was sent

They were referred with all kinds of counselors, committees, let alone , et cetera, which required the president to sit down and listen to the kids that they agreed with, et cetera.

And so they could just give them money, or what on earth they really had to give them, for example, if they were really advised or anything like that.

Yes.

Well,

We're able to be fully in the government and trust them and back them up.

And that leaves the president free, first, to participate in, not just preside, because I participate.

I don't just preside.

I participate in those areas that are out

That leaves them also in a position, this is the other one, which is very important.

It leaves them in a position to have what lies very justifiably besides what I recommend.

That is time, free time, free time.

I mean, it's just things.

And there is very, very hard to thank Jeff, but I have had more time, I want to thank him.

And I want to have him write a speech at a very best conference, or just think about a conference, or call in at some other, and say, this has been talked about very, very hard.

So I've had a long conversation with his future, and I've talked to a lot of his children, and there was no accident in which I was so good.

But the mistakes I've made there, I've made.

In the domestic field, I'm trying to do the same thing.

I'm trying to get the government to reorganize in such a way that the president can spend more time, more time on the very

And we shall see over the next four years how successful we are in this respect.

And, of course, probably as important, in the domestic field as important,

There will be less councils, committees, et cetera, formal ones for the president.

For example, yesterday I spent an hour and a half with Reverend Codd.

You know, Reverend Codd.

And it had nothing to do with the future at all.

And I talked to him about it.

I like to do it on a man-to-man basis rather than a big committee sitting around a whole group of people.

They don't need any comments.

They're all watching each other.

They're an individual.

Coming back to your point, the purpose of our organization is to

But they are not one to be sanctioned.

So I don't know what happened to them.

I found a way to do that.

As you know, I'm based here in Michigan.

So I have all this science group, medical group,

I remember the first paper I think I decided to receive had to do with a grant of, with a presidential approval of some senior opposition regarding the work we were doing.

I spent hours at the present time.

I have experts.

They give me a recommendation and I will respond to it.

Another thing I would like to say is that

Yeah.

I have to get to that.

I never have.

I've always wanted to.

I like to go here, there, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this.

It's been hours, hours to be part of it.

Hours to provide us with .

There was something the other day on pianos.

When I first came to Los Angeles, it meant hours, talking about whether or not we should provide that relief for the piano .

See that?

That also works the church.

They're not alone up there.

They'd like to get things up there.

They also want to come up to the president's office and talk about all this.

because it makes them feel that way.

I like them to feel that way.

You know, the other hand, I, the way I like to do it is according to the student's market position.

You want to do a job, you want to do the work, you can do it like that.

But I do not get myself in my mind, I'm flattered at it, but a lot of times, frankly, where I don't know enough about it, and don't need to learn anything, and I'm not going to learn anything, but I learn about it, and I don't need to know about it in order to make a good decision.

I know that the great deal

There is a potential election .

I'd like to .

At this time, let's move on to the next one.

You mentioned energy.

I spent a lot of time on energy already.

I will have to immerse myself in energy.

They should call me because here in the Army's residential district,

also involves foreign policy in terms of the sort of pipeline deals, the meetings.

And so, in action, the kind of foreign policy, well, there's a lot of questions, and they can message questions in terms of whether or not they're going to come out.

So, I don't have to make those calls.

And also, other than this, it cuts across so many agencies of government that there couldn't be one over it all.

It would create such a jealousy, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

First, the problem is important.

Second, it is one, the problem is very important.

Partly because of the fact that the goal of this policy

It is one that has to be drawn into the White House because it covers so many agencies.

And only the president can pull it together and crack the heads.

And we're going to have oil imports over and over.

We're going to raise the price of gas over and over.

We're going to be halfway over and over.

I've got to know all of those things.

I'm listening.

I frankly wouldn't trust anybody else to make that decision.

Now, let me give you an example of a past that I have written, that I have prepared an example of, and I've written it on my own.

It was written by my brother, my brother, my brother-in-law, my brother-in-law.

He said, we're getting the schools to stop.

And with all of the records, and with all of the references that we've given to the right to this, I consider it one of the major achievements.

I've never really met him.

I read it on the free and open society, that paper, the paper, the paper, the thing I think is very important that you can get the book, or it, or your show, is how you did it.

Somebody was asking, well, why is it that, uh, uh, uh, the experts, uh,

But you see, the professional civil writer, the professional civil writer, unfortunately, too often is part of the issue of the record that he used for himself.

He would be brilliant, but he would get up on the press conference and damn the racist assignments and segregations and the rest.

And then he would be a great hero, and he would invite people

But, insofar as desegregating the schools was soundly concerned, we would not have done that.

We would have ended in an after incident with the police in the schoolhouse door, and the president would have lied out, perhaps, and solved the problem.

And again, we don't remember that.

Now, the way we did that was to set up these committees, a committee where you expect black

And I said, now, I'm expecting you

I also realized that you have a high regard for respect for law.

I said, now we're going to have respect for law.

He said, you've got to bring this about.

And it was brought about.

They were ready to tear each other apart.

But that was not what happened.

As a result, desegregation itself is a much more, it is, you have far more integration of the schools themselves.

It was accomplished over three or four years.

By persuasion, without him, I never thought he would have made more points with those who were finished with the dissertation.

By showing, basically, what they call the reverend cares, and what I care about is getting the job done, getting it done, without turning the society apart, getting it solved.

So that was one where I took the responsibility.

Because no one else could do it.

Michelle Frick, with the president, ran that thing.

I ran it with a very, I should say, with an enormously important assistant, Schultz.

Schultz was the operator, as I said, and the attorney.

I'm not going to do that identification.

The only man, for example.

See, I was in a very good position.

Actually, I, in the 1960s, never had a precedence on the show.

And yet, not considered by the blacks and the racists.

I was able, I was the only one that could really bring in the top black white leadership in the South and enlist them.

They all thought that it was

So, see, this was not a case in question.

H.W.

would have been considered on the white side as being a black-oriented department.

But when the president spoke, that didn't fit.

So, there you go.

Now you're coming to the president.

Besides that, actually,

I have to do that because I have to get involved in all this labor, and get involved in this whole system of care and assistance.

their willingness to abide by the law and by the regulations in which they were able to succeed.

So it's very, very smart of the President of the United States of America to show that.

And I'll just break it back to you.

In other words, if you're right on the law,

by the law.

And you see, we have the law.

We have the law.

We have the law that's been around for a long time.

We have the legislation that makes the regulations.

That requires also a lot of .

I spent a lot of time .

I fell out of line with Herb Stein, the Board of Counselors, you know, in my years.

I don't, you know, base through whatever, you know, I took.

I'm sure I took better.

I think I took better.

There's been a war going on.

That would buy us a little public position now, a little crisis now, now, and we agree with it.

I mean, the national contract is later in the process.

If we're not yet at the promise of supply, I mean, let me jump over to the national contract.

You may be able to check on that if you want to talk about it.

already, and they had to do it because it was mixed up with the labor price, and that is the record of the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the,

unless it's economically profitable for the refiners and the producers, et cetera.

But then, take for example another reason that I have to do this work.

It again involves a boycott.

It involves getting rid of quarters.

It involves getting rid of territory.

.

It's a matter of taking the presidential .

And I've only got the stockpile.

The stockpile is $7.3 million in stockpile purposes and stuff.

If we've got a war, we've got to get a stockpile.

All right.

Now, that is far more than the whole stockpile program set up.

It needs to be accurate and true.

So I have made the decision.

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

But there has been a suggestion that .

And I think that's .

I have yet to see anything like that.

The problem is that there's no way to crack those or say that it would be a good idea for Jack Price to ever play as a bloodshot.

I guess that's true.

So, uh, but I have given a, I've given a direct answer to that question.

I have, of course, given it to the students in my group.

But, uh, I, I cannot tolerate the position given to the, uh, to the Kepa Rockets with a very, very small, very system because of the way we are, uh, you know,

I don't think, I don't think, I don't think, I don't think, I don't think,

the opportunity to go into the back of that reform of a peer country and be one that would just add enormous numbers to the welfare rolls.

I mean, that was not his purpose.

His purpose was not to have a bonus for welfare, but a bonus for work.

It was wrong to have the working poor out there, a guy earning four or five thousand bucks a year trying to support his family.

for him to get less than his neighbor sitting there in his back, not willing to work, sitting alone there.

I think we will probably have to work very hard.

We have a menstrual pump that goes into the president's tank right now, and it goes quite well.

It may, it may, but not energies at the present time.

Energies

In other words, when they ran the whole series and put everybody on this fire, that affected lots of people.

We got to a point in the imagination where all people have degrees and all people have

water, all people have to likely to park, all that sort of thing.

Therefore, the environment has an issue with water that is able to attract other people.

Energy will only attract a lively public interest when people run out of it.

So it gets one way or the other.

I would say we have a problem.

I think we can solve it.

But it's a problem that there's not going to be press.

People will get complaints that we don't know what we're going to do.

It's just something that we're trying to do.

It's not the right thing.

Because that issue is years ahead.

We've got to get our supplies up at this time.

We've got to build that pipeline.

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

shale oil, say that's another reason why energy doesn't action.

You can't let anybody go around .

So you've got nuclear energy, you've got shale, you've got ventilation that's cooling, et cetera.

And that also ties also, and energy, it also ties into the fire.

It's rather hard to talk about energy precisely because that's not a way

I'll tell you why they have to be presidential.

It's because on each of these issues, each of these missions, it cuts across the whole gamut.

There are more energies, there are more policies.

There's environmental, there's civil society, there's the children's department.

And everybody, like an energy, has other things.

The fight, the bureaucracy, the building, the missions, everything.

I should mention one other.

It has to do with where we're going to get our raw materials.

It has to do with how we can continue to keep our markets

and still not import in a way that destroys our jobs.

The way I personally trade with you, the way I talk to you, the way I talk to you, the way I talk to you, the way I talk to you, the way I talk to you, the way I talk to you, the way I talk to you, the way I talk to you, the way I talk to you,

I said, I'm worried about that.

I don't want Americans to lose jobs.

Before, I said, we're producing this stuff cheaply.

But I said, there's another side to that.

We export $3 billion worth of stock every year.

I said, I don't want to lose those jobs for those $50 to $50 million that we're exporting.

So what we have to do is to have a system where we both export and export.

Of course, having said that, the jobs

The trade thing also has to do with our foreign policy.

It has to do with it.

It could be very, very tough with Japan on trade.

It would be so tough to drive Japan to an end of America.

And it would be extremely tough on Europe on trade.

And yet, if you adopt a policy

We did not serve our political interests.

And then, of course, we have special concerns.

We're waiting to make some trade promises.

For our part, we're also going to serve by having...

But now we've got to come to the budget.

The budget.

The reason is, of course, the budget is always a problem for the government.

Always a problem for the government.

But, uh,

the health of the economy because of the tax inflation.

It also determines the role of government in so many of the social areas of the United States.

And here, what they're really trying to do is by all means jack them up.

It's like, you look back at the video.

I think most of us would say that the AAA, the men in the alphabetical agency, the NRA and the rest of them, they were perhaps exciting ideas at the time, some of them did work.

But if you look at Social Security, it did work.

So at the present time, nobody's saying, I'm appealing to Social Security, we increase it.

So it is, the most effective community action, I mean, that is an example, you know,

is on, what I expect the campaign is on, so-called social programs.

Community action programs.

Since, you know, we only have that at a budget of $2 billion.

Even 5% of that money has gone to the democracy.

58%.

What I am attacking is the trickle-down theory.

The trickle-down theory of economics.

The big corporations trickle down for the workers.

What I am attacking is the trickle-down theory

or process as applied to government services.

You see, I come back to my family position.

We believe in income strategy.

We believe, in other words, in income strategy.

Rather than a whole layer of bureaucrats and social workers and all the rest get directed to the main line.

Now, we know we owe a good bit to these enemy action programs.

That's completely true.

80% goes to bureaucrats all the way down the line.

50% goes to the board.

That's not a good contract to the board.

So, how does it work?

We know a lot.

We know it's handled.

We know all the merits, not from that program.

And that, of course, will leverage the funds.

But that is typical of our philosophy throughout.

It is, I might say that's also typical of the United States.

It describes Special Revenue Sheriff, that's another thing.

I wouldn't say it's a better name, but because people confuse it with General Revenue Sheriff.

General Revenue Sheriff is simply the way whereby the Federal Revenue, which is the best

Shares out of the revenue for the slaves and citizens of the counties.

And the slaves think that the citizens of the counties should back them up as a result of it.

And it will continue.

But it's new money.

It's not there as a substitute for the category of the programs which government has.

And for those of you who may have thought, where did we cut out something like that?

We actually put it out on the map.

We just bought the basic of the rules.

Now, especially when they show us something like that.

You take it.

We actually, overall, are going to put more dollars, bottom line, there'll be more.

So by the night of September 3, 1974, we had all our nipples in the list.

Instead of having a cripple down to a number of weeks in category three, and, of course, the Congress decided how much work to do, how much time to have, the Congress decided, by the way, we may want to write down to the local government.

Now we have this harder to understand.

which is underlying history, and it doesn't get out very much, but those with bonus on this don't want to say this, because it's very weird, and it's very opposition.

And, and, and basically, basically, the problem with literature is that virtually every politician pays to the principle of federalism,

The principle is that we should have decentralization, that we should have people power, world control, civil control, state control, rather than all of those things.

There is a considerable body of extra change on the liberal side of this country that the most

But basically, when people in Washington are more confident, and in Franklin, the local government is more corrupt, less confident, they will spend the money for purposes that are not as good as, shall we say, conservative, or as if, as if those decisions remain at the federal level.

Now, if you accept that proposition,

Our whole approach, which is revolutionary, is a child's revolution.

Our whole approach is law.

But if you accept that approach, then it means that governments, mayors, council officials are going to end up with being not a good person, not a good person.

That's important.

Law is not a good one.

It's an enemy.

to pick up the building, with which, as a matter of fact, it was suspended as Washington.

People here in the Bureau of Internal Affairs, they should stand with me.

Now, in my belief, what I think is right here is basically the so-called Nixon doctrine applied to the method of bail, as far as the South Vietnamese are concerned.

how we have trained them in art, and how they've ever had a possibility with art to do the same thing as themselves.

So it is with other types of art, rather than our going in and making the decisions for them.

We think that is the only way they will gain the strength

I would need, uh, I would need very, very confidence, uh, to run their countries.

Uh, whether it's appealing to the government abroad that you're helping, or a city or a county or state that you're helping.

If you help them too much, I would judge them wrong.

Too much in terms of making the decisions for them.

They're going to remain weak and confident in practicing corruption.

If, on the other hand, you say to them, look here, now the ball's in your court.

We've hit you with a go.

We've provided the money.

But you don't have to be trying to get money from the gymnasium or what do you want to do?

From our police.

Because maybe one of the counties that it would support you in, some other county, is foreign police.

But you're going to have to decide it.

We're not going to decide it.

If you want to do it, you're going to have to decide it.

Or if you want to do the housing project, you're going to decide it.

Now, this may not work.

What I'm going to say is, I'm not saying, I'm not sure, I can't say for sure it's going to work.

But I think it's right, because I believe that we need to strengthen

the quality of our government at all levels.

Let me put it another way.

When the government of Washington makes a mistake, it's a human mistake.

Because it covers the whole country.

And the government of California, big as it is, like Nelson Rockefeller in the U.S., it's a human mistake.

But it's one man's mistake.

And the other side of the crime is that the states and cities, counties, will put in positive terms, rather than make the states, they would make the spare of the nation a nation of the rest.

I never proved, I never proved that.

We were trying to get more brains, more competence, more ability on the job.

I did talk to Nelson about this.

I think Nelson and Nelson were half-truthers.

Nelson and Nelson were, you know, they were speaking to each other.

But the other half-truthers were half-truthers.

The point is that you talk to him, and they say, my God, you're pretty dangerous to let some mayor do that.

And I say, what we are doing is not good for the rest of our people.

And what I know about the Americans is that it is their right of self-government and their responsibility to govern.

And it's really, and let me put it another way.

I got a letter in the news about this, about the Congress, about the President of the United States, about the President of the United States, about the President of the United States,

Our economy is less than the national average going back 50 years.

The point is that, and the reason we have an economy where everybody can't live is because of the money.

We sure had an economy where we had to buy inflation and we had to raise taxes.

I have much not to raise taxes.

I think we cannot afford to keep our economy.

So as far as power goes.

But the other point is, is the grasping power.

I'm sure you realize that what we are offering here in terms of our special relationship is the greatest, the best mature power that the first country's ever seen.

We're the best at the power.

There's a paradox going on here.

The old New Deal of Law.

That's right, that's right, that's right.

You are developing what I'm already doing, and what I'm doing is stronger and stronger and stronger and stronger and stronger and stronger and stronger and stronger.

I think it could be.

that it is not simply a case of coming back.

It's a case, actually, of trying to demand.

We're spending more, $18 billion, more than we did in 1973.

We're spending more for the cities, and the counties, and the streets,

But we're trying to spend it in a different way, in a better way.

That is what we are going to do.

Now, obviously, members of Congress, they see their pet program as a message.

Now, this is the thing.

The reason that Congress is objective to this, and the reason they're objective, is that they see that not only is the president the best

We're asking for kindness.

To give up what it is, what it is, the developers of this enormous concentration of power, where Congress can have senators, may have, I mean, no one else can have action for this program, this program, this program, or every week, or every day, every month, every day, every one of these stuff you're going to have to go to the level that everyone's going to have.

That is the problem.

They don't want to do that.

I understand that.

But that's where the battle line is wrong.

We may not succeed.

I'm watching that.

I'm sorry.

No, no.

I'm not.

Each one of them ended over and over and over and over.

He and I have been with most of the government now.

And the war will be not only because of the practice, which he has done on the rocks, but the reason we're fighting, in this case, we're fighting the practice.

We're fighting not our practice.

I remember that.

The captain officers, the sub-captain, they are all equivalent in law.

Because we brought them in to hold them.

We're just seeing them up there.

And the next layer of bureaucracy, the civil service, you know, we're dealing with all the way through.

There's an intricate web of intricacies.

They could live this way so long.

You know, it just affects their way of doing business.

And then, of course, out in this city, there's a whole web of immigrants.

I mean, there are offices for forestry, there are offices for fisheries, there are offices for rural development, or I don't know what it is.

You know, every time we have had in this country a little labor signal device, people have said, that's not good.

If you remember in the Depression days, there were various people who suggested that instead of using the power holders and all that sort of thing, that we ought to have new ones.

But that has put an end to work.

Now, all of those objections have proved to be untrue.

This, it isn't at all important.

What I accept is that

There's always going to be plenty of work to be done.

Plenty of work to be accomplished.

And the Congress can try and solve it.

And it's attention to the world.

To a bigger picture, perhaps.

To a bigger picture.

To the world.

straight into the wood charcoal.

Sure.

I met my brother-in-law in 2011.

The breakfast was cleared to settle down for a four- or five-hour conversation, if we talked any more at the time.

And in those days, I don't know, Jim Carr's father at the time, and I was even working on it.

I thought that was the time we were still working on it.

Sure.

And, well, I wasn't at home.

But I was desperate to speak to him through the outside world.

No, he was the greatest mechanic in Chinese-born family.

No, no.

the British.

They had all the guns.

The British had the electricity.

George Washington didn't have any.

What do you think of that?

I'm sure he has picked up through the technology, every history of technology.

He can't run that quickly without being great.

But then he evolved so he was still right.

But he was right.

He was right about the analogy.

He was wrong about the specificity.

The basic thing is the guy behind the gun is probably the guy behind the gun.

But when he was talking to the USA, he couldn't really talk to him.

Well, I thought it would be...

I'm telling you, the process is different.

I hope you see it through.

Thank you.

Um, yeah, yeah.

I promise I will show you what I write.

Yeah.

How did Donald Trump show approval of any of these events, conversations, to work on every conversation that he had in this country?

It was a very important conversation with America on his last day.

With about the United States, which is the world's most important country.

I thought of this, I think, with the reflection that out there in the world of politics, whatever we do, whether we're poets, whether we're practice, whether we say we're, some are, some are a combination of art forms, art forms.

If you were to make the difference, I guess it's an opposite of derogation, I'm sure a lot of people would say.

The will of the nation today is not as responsible as the will of the nation, but it probably has the will of the nation to do that.

And the way it wraps up the whole of America is a power complex.

He's a son of a boy, son of a philosopher.

Basically, he's a great operator, very fast.

Now, despite the fact that he ain't on this, I'm sorry I was on the screen.

But now, as you know,

They always .

Basically, .

And that's one of the reasons revolution .

A revolutionary leader .

George Washington.

I agree with your reference, Senator.

George Washington was a man who was very much engaged in the property of the rest of the people that lived there.

And in search of the same story, you know, as far as, you know, the commonalities of the United States.

But every role of a stranger has to have a very strong and strong political philosophy.

It must be the same.

I don't know, I can't, I don't want to say this, but basically, if I read it off now, or if I just wrote it, or if I just read it, I can say that he thinks, he doesn't, he doesn't get down to the big, great kind of, kind of, kind of, he just, you know, kind of, you know, kind of, you know,

But this is really his strength.

And as the world speaks to him, you know, so that he cannot play the boy that he wants to play, he gets to play the boy that he wants to play.

But Paul thinks in conceptual terms that he has to.

And he has a very, he has a remarkable understanding.

He probably can't tell you, I probably wouldn't be able to tell you whether or not San Francisco was as big as Los Angeles.

But, or whether the difference between the east and the west, or the south, or the east and the south.

But he understands.

He understands what the United States means to the world.

He understands what Japan means to the world.

He understands what PRC means to the world.

He also understands the whole third world, the revolution.

In other words, his understanding

Well, perhaps the average, the average Western citizen

the size of the country, its population, its GNP, the size of its army, its air force, its trade policies, and so forth.

Now, they know this.

But I don't think that's his interest right now.

And yet, without

you probably understand some words better than the rest of the fiction.

Now, Joe and I, I suppose it's not because it's now or a comment, of course, but because it's Joe and I in a sense.

Joe and I also has some, Joe and I, because it's parallel,

has to deal with the day-to-day problems and become a strength of the world.

And he can tell you a great deal about the Jewish country population, et cetera, et cetera.

And yet, in a conversation with

You know, quite a way.

You know, it's a little bit, you know, it's active.

I don't know.

I don't know what he's talking about.

I don't know.

and we're going to the next year, and we're going to the next generation, and we're going to the next generation.

It's a...

And his mind all fluttered up.

It's trivia.

But the more your mind is fluttered up, the trickier, the less you really understand.

But the Rick Bush part of it was determined.

I don't know.

uh... uh... uh... uh... uh...

and seeing that at this time in history, it serves the interests of this country and of ours.

For us, in certain areas, it's wonderful.

And, uh, that, uh, and that makes a question, let me address it another way.

Later on,

They're never going to make cheap players.

They're never going to make small players.

They're always going to make big players.

And even though they, as you said,

He wasn't learned now.

Or when he learned, he probably doesn't know a lot more.

Because he knew a lot about me.

I was a Jewish man.

He knew what I said.

He knew my background.

He knew all about the Jewish world.

But what I mean is, many times in a meeting with a Jewish student, I can't

I guess you're on 46 hours.

And of course, that's an hour after .

Many times, the head of state will spend an arduous amount of time on ,, which you should simply say, hey, how about you work that out and get your acting on?

That's what a special session .

I hope that's your point.

My point is, the leader, the leader who got to talk to me, and thank you, my brother, because the decisions of the United States and the PRC, all these day-to-day issues which are determined by, and you know, how each

The two sides of each other not trusting each other.

Not trusting each other in terms of personal affection.

Not trusting each other in terms of each understands what's brought them together.

How their interest will be served, and about the work that they'll be serving.

It's a great conversation.

I get better at this stuff now.

I get better.

No, you see what I mean?

I think you can give a little of that.

It is obvious, there are obvious reasons.

I cannot, I cannot, in fact, your conversations are so important that I'm not serving national interest.

And one of the reasons they're employed is that it's an accident of history.

I have children, but I don't have very much of a life.

I don't have anything to do with it.

He got caught in a car accident.

He got caught in a small race car accident.

Yeah.

And he had to break a leg.

He had no idea what he was doing.

As a matter of fact, curiously, Rush and I have a similar relationship.

Rush and I have always talked about each other.

Rush and I have a very different relationship.

I'm very proud of it.

But the point is, it tells you something about it.

Too many people write about it.

They get too many deaths.

What does this poem show, and what does this do, and what does that do?

I don't know.

You've got to get up there and see the great forces in the world, and the nations of the world, and whether the band is in tune with those forces.

Because other children are going to be gone.

There's no way that these other children

I think in this case, you know, you're actually, you know, you're going to be in a good job.

You're going to push back a little bit.

It wasn't, it was, but that, that, because of my background, I think, learned it all the hard way, all the way.

That, despite the fact that it doesn't seem to, you know, that it is, it is, I cannot always, you know, have any of this, you know, I need to get into this kind of life, so I've got to get out of the other direction, you know.

I said this after I had battled George Floyd and I think

And in fact, I said it before I met him.

I was only guessing.

I was only guessing, but when I met him, I was confirmed.

The fellow has that, he has that kind of, I'll let you, let me give you another example of this.

Basically, this is Churchill's philosophy.

Churchill's philosophy, basically, he had a great world grasp

If de Gaulle had been the head of France before World War I, France would have been more successful.

Because de Gaulle did understand that if you thought you could go out of here, you could spend a lot of money.

In other words, so much money.

Curious money.

That's the only history when I was there.

I saw MacArthur after the war.

I saw MacArthur during the war.

He had liked me very much.

And I went to the war.

Covered the time magazine.

And, look, he was there.

He wrote a hell of a reference.

He wanted to get into that.

When he fled to the Philippines, I remember MacArthur was asleep there.

And he said, take me.

Do you know what the worst name in the world is?

I'm sure you've seen it.

American Indian is not a second-rate name.

American Indian is not a third-rate name.

The American Indian is a fourth-rate name.

He's a different one back from the Coral Sea.

After he took off on the U.S. Navy, he didn't take off on the only cap of Russia.

He didn't take off on Franklin D. Roosevelt, but was a particular.

There's a theory about that.

I found where he was then, I think, at the end.

I was facing this in my competition.

How he saw the world.

Make no mistake about church.

Make no mistake about the world states that I have.

The ones who really saw the big picture.

The question about who goes to jail.

I thought Joe and I, I'll tell you who Joe and I are.

Joe was the nation's president of 490 in China.

And he closed up on Congress.

Closed the Congress, pressed the church.

Joe and I went down very late.

And I think I know a little bit about it.

I think I know a little bit about it.

Well, I see that.

I would put him in that category because of the set.

He has to be a private person because he's lurking out every day.

You know, for example, when we were going out that day to the wall, when we were there, he left the dog on the, when we were there, it was a nasty day, and he left out.

He probably had to go to the bathroom while he was checking out to see if the roads were going.

So he wouldn't

He was living alone.

He was on a nap in the car.

He spent an enormous amount of time with me.

But in conversation, Joe and I would get along.

But if I was there, I would say that we had known each other earlier.

After all, I saw him.

I knew him.

but he does not get into

He would not get it through.

He was more interested in articulating the size of it with the man.

And that's what he had.

And everything was the same.

Some of it occurred to him that he was trying to make his own .

He could have spent the time saying, oh, .

Not again.

He wastes his time because he knew there was more race to do.

He had to determine whether or not, frankly, and I would say the same thing to him, you know, whatever race he wanted to be, he would say, you know, trust me.

He would trust you.

He doesn't trust me in that sense, or I, you know, I can't be really good at this.

And also, whether, let me put it this way, whether I was,

ideological center on the other hand that's why our conversation began we're brought together here by

I think he's more of a president than I am.

But I guess one thing, you told me last time, that the payday position was a tough one.

Oh yes, that's it.

I mean, it was a Christmas one.

That one killed me.

I'd like to get, I mean, you have to pay that first.

You have to pay very, very high.

Now, by the way, but I don't know.

There must be one element about it.

I agree with that.

That's why I was so afraid to mention it.

I said what was wrong.

I felt what's wrong.

I told you to do something.

Well, the main decision was tough, but the reason it was easier than the other one was that, you know, when you come down to, you come down to say, it's on someone's cell, you know,

like the World War I, World War II, Wilson had to let the war end the ally, World War II, Eisenhower had to help, had to let it end.

And so we had to, we had to, we had to, I analyzed the situation, I determined that I could not let Russia get the, start to get the case of Benson,

I did go and ask the offensive that the summit would be a dismal thing that the Russians would, and I would, leaders, predictably and understandably, would have to treat and would prohibit respect.

That's one of the circumstances.

I was sitting at the Kremlin meeting with President Bush.

The American people wouldn't understand it.

President Bush would have understood it.

So what are the circumstances we have with Bush now?

What do we do?

And there, the better part of that decision was that we did enough.

Some suggested just enough.

I knew that was the best.

He said, my name is David LaFleur.

Even my name was Devon.

When I learned that it was one of these, I knew that we'd get four or five months.

We were going to come back.

We were really going to save the game.

And then I reached for the sweet spot.

I was going to manage it back on the ground.

And I did.

And I lost the rest of the classes.

So it made a significant difference.

It made it.

I know that if someone was first jeopardized, I'm sure that I would say that I made that decision vigorously.

I wouldn't do it.

That's not true.

There's a very high risk of jeopardizing.

And I didn't do it.

It would jeopardize the election.

But I have a choice.

I did not allow anyone to do it.

As I said, by the power of gradual escalation basis, but at that, whatever, high, maximum basis, it was effectively stopping the offensive.

And, in fact, it gave me the respect that I had to have in order to negotiate any kind of an equal deal with the Russians.

Now, they didn't like it.

And we had some rugged conversations about the war attempt.

But nevertheless, in the United States, we have a very productive force.

Now, in December 18th, the question I was going to ask you was the expectation of the Pacific military government.

So I'm going to give it a lot of attention, of course, but I realize that there's a lot to be said.

I should just go on.

That's why I had to back off.

They heard it.

Election.

So the election, and we asked the people, as far as they were concerned, what the war was about.

And we had received word from the governor of the state that we were going to be ready to pass the law.

So all the election process was passed through the federal government.

Sign, sign, sign.

So I felt very confident the second you were on.

And I left.

I was talking to the doctor.

But at what it was, they walked, they went up there.

They backed off, but they didn't do anything about it.

They backed off and they didn't do anything about it.

They didn't do anything about it.

Whatever they back off, what they were doing there, they were backing off so far that they were making a damn punch.

But they backed off of what they had to be doing.

There's no way that we could take a less, uh, effort in the field, after the election, than we have here.

Uh, you know, they're expected to clap in the opposite room.

And many doctors don't have all the connections that they would have had in the election time.

They don't have connections to the pocket, or the pocket, or the damage, you know.

But they've judged America.

They realize that we are a place of justice.

That's what happened.

I don't know if that's what it was.

It's obvious that, you know, I was, you know, you know, an archaeologist, and the record would show that I was, you know, in a position to be a better actor, which means that, you know, I was, you know, it's clear that my childhood gift

We then had to decide.

We had to decide.

We thought that if the Lord did do that, that we could continue.

But this time, of course, we give up the bomb.

We don't want to talk about it.

We don't want to give up the bomb.

We don't want to talk about it.

And if we do not have a second, then it goes on.

And I can see that I'm looking ahead again.

So, even though it's Christmas coming up, the election, everybody's going to relax.

We're going to do it.

I'm going to do it.

I don't need that.