Popular Posts

You know, ladies and gentlemen, this is my pocket copy of the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Now, in the last half century, I've probably read this a thousand times. I've looked around it, those who wrote it, the history at the time, what they meant, depending on which words, which phrase, which section, which clause we're dealing with. And I went back and I took a look earlier today, and I cannot find this phrase, birthright citizenship. I have looked everywhere. I've looked in the penumbras and emanations, and I can't find it. I've looked at the invisible ink. I can't find it. Birthright citizenship. And yet, last week, there was a big argument in front of the Supreme Court. And the justices, a couple of them were really wise, but most of them were like, kind of strange, getting into policy and politics and quirky examples and things of that sort. So I thought I'd bring us back down to earth and deal with this, because sometimes lawyers, particularly lawyers with black robes, who think they're really smart, they get carried away with themselves. Let's get back to brass tacks here. Let's get back to the facts. You ready? We have this Dred Scott decision in 1857. It was a diabolical decision. And it held in short that blacks, whether enslaved or free, were not US citizens. Now the court led by Chief Justice Roger Taney ruled that black people, descendants of imported slaves, were not included in the citizenship definition of the Constitution. And I quote, had no rights which the white man was bound to respect. Now that was a seven to two decision and the decision helped trigger the Civil War, our costliest war with over 700,000 casualties that almost destroyed the country. That war was fought for two reasons, to keep the union together and to eliminate slavery. So following the Civil War, after these horrendous battles and these horrendous casualties and so forth, certain formally Confederate states, they passed restrictive laws called Black Codes. Now what did these Black Codes do? They limited the freedoms of former slaves. Despite the Civil War, it was also a time when the Klan came into being founded by former Confederate generals and so forth. Well, Congress had already adopted the 13th Amendment in 1865, right at the end of the Civil War, that formally abolished slavery throughout the country. But they determined that the 13th Amendment alone was obviously not enough to guarantee freed slaves their civil liberties, including citizenship and equal rights and equal protection and due process. So Congress took action, after all it was controlled by the Republicans. So Congress in 1866 passed our first Civil Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1866. Now that act formally declared that all persons born in the United States, anywhere in the United States except Indians, were citizens, granting them equal protection under federal law. Why not Indians or Native Americans? Because in many cases the tribes were considered their own nations, their own nations. You could be a citizen of two nations at the same time, especially within the Americas. So they passed that. Now what did it state in relevant part? The Civil Rights Act of 1866, which is crucially relevant to this discussion. "Be it enacted that all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power." In other words, not a citizen of another country. "Excluding Indians not taxed are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States." This again was aimed at what? At the former slaves, their family, their children, their future children, and the black codes in these southern states that were preventing the implementation of equal rights and citizenship. "And such citizens of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right in every state and territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, to be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, to purchase, to sell, to hold, and convey real and personal property, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings, for the security of every person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to the contrary notwithstanding." A complete repudiation of the Dred Scott and a complete repudiation of the black codes. So this act was intended to reverse the Supreme Court's decision and eliminate these black codes. So they passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the overwhelmingly Republican Congress. And what happens? Well, the bill goes to a Democrat by the name of Andrew Johnson, who'd been Vice President, but became President on the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. He was a Democrat from Tennessee. So President Johnson vetoed the Civil Rights Act of 1866. But there were enough Republicans in Congress to override his veto, so it remained the law. But the Republican Congress was concerned about the ease with which a law could be changed. It even eliminated down the road. They saw what Johnson tried to do. Thus was born the impetus for the 14th Amendment. Their purpose was to constitutionalize the Civil Rights Act of 1866. How do we know this? Because they told us this. John A. Bingham, B-I-N-G-H-A-M, these are great patriots. He was a House Republican from Ohio. In the House, he was the main drafter considered the Madison of the 14th Amendment of the language in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, which includes the Citizenship Clause. He was a member of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction in the 39th Congress, which formulated the amendment to provide a constitutional basis for civil rights following the Civil War. That is the constitutionalization of the 1866 Civil Rights Act. Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania, a well-known, famous, so-called radical Republican and Republican leader in the House, helped him draft the amendment and helped him usher it through the committee. On the other side of the Capitol, on the Senate, Senator Lyman Trumbull, a Republican of Illinois, notice they're all Republicans, he had drafted the 13th Amendment that had been passed in 1865, abolishing slavery formally, and was a contributor, if not the main writer, of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. He was a key figure also in drafting that process of drafting of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Trumbull. Then we have Senator Jacob Howard, a Republican of Michigan, who introduced the amendment in the Senate, declaring, among other things, it would extend the Bill of Rights to the states, every state. Now what exactly does Section 1 of the 14th Amendment say? The language that is being debated, that was heard in front of the Supreme Court, which they say gave birth to birthright citizenship. Well, we know it doesn't say that. What exactly does it say? Quote, right here, in my little pocket Constitution, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Remember, in the Civil Rights Act a few years earlier, which is intended to constitutionalize, it talked about having no allegiance to a foreign country or foreign nation. Here, they basically implement that by saying subject to the jurisdiction thereof, meaning subject to the United States and the jurisdiction of the United States. "Are citizens of the United States and the state wherein they reside?" Remember, they're doing this because of these black codes in these formerly Confederate states. "They're citizens of the United States and of the citizen wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Boy, that doesn't sound like it has a lot to do with immigration, let alone illegal immigrants, let alone the children of illegal immigrants in the United States, because it didn't.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A news-style photograph of an older man with blond-combed hair, wearing a navy suit, white shirt, bright red tie and a small American flag lapel pin. He walks toward the camera with his right hand raised in a wave, with a serious expression. Behind him on an airport tarmac is a dark green military helicopter with its rotor blades visible and partial white lettering reading "UNITED S" on the side, its door open with steps. Uniformed Marines in dress uniforms, partly blurred, stand to the right. The sky is overcast. There is no caption or overlay text.

Text in image: UNITED S

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

A two-panel composite image showing close-up architectural renderings (appear to be 3D-rendered or CGI, all in white/off-white stone color) of elaborate Corinthian-style column capitals. The left panel shows a row of fluted white columns topped with ornate capitals decorated with acanthus leaves and carved lion heads, supporting a decorated entablature/cornice with dentil molding and relief carvings, against a small patch of blue sky. The right panel is a closer zoomed-in view of a single capital, showing detailed acanthus leaf carving and two roaring lion head sculptures projecting from the top of the column, beneath the ornate cornice.

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

A photograph of the exterior of a large neoclassical building, shot at a low upward angle along its colonnade. A row of tall white fluted columns with ornate Corinthian capitals (carved acanthus-leaf decoration) supports an elaborately decorated entablature/cornice with dentil molding and relief carvings. The building's facade recedes into the distance under a mostly clear blue sky with some wispy clouds. Dark windows are visible between columns in the background. The architecture resembles a U.S. government building (e.g., a courthouse or capitol-style structure), though no signage or identifying text is visible.

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

This is a computer-generated architectural rendering of a large neoclassical white stone building addition, viewed from a lawn. The structure features a long facade with a row of tall arched windows on the upper level and a colonnade of tall square/rectangular windows below, topped with a balustrade roofline. On the right side, a grand classical portico with tall Corinthian columns and a triangular pediment projects forward, accessed by wide staircases. On the left, a curved staircase descends from a lower wing toward the lawn. A few small human figures are scattered near the building for scale, along with trees on either side, a paved walking path, and a manicured green lawn in the foreground under a blue sky with wispy clouds and a faint contrail.

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

A computer-generated architectural rendering of a large neoclassical building, likely a proposed ballroom/reception hall addition. The structure is white/cream colored with a long facade of tall arched second-story windows above a row of rectangular ground-floor windows with balustrade-topped balconies. A grand curved double staircase leads up to a broad terrace fronted by a colonnade of tall fluted columns with ornate Corinthian capitals supporting a decorated entablature and a balustraded roofline. Small digitally rendered human figures (used for scale) stand on the terrace and staircase. The building sits on a manicured green lawn, with a paved walkway and a dark road visible in the foreground, and additional grounds/paved area visible in the background to the right.

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

A stylized, painterly digital illustration of a man resembling Donald Trump, shown from the knees up, wearing a red "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN" cap, a dark long overcoat over a navy suit with white shirt and red tie. He stands with his head tilted slightly down, looking stern/serious, arms at his sides. Behind him is an artistic, distressed rendering of an American flag (stars in upper left, red/white stripes in splattered paint style) blending into a dark city skyline silhouette with a tall spire resembling the Empire State Building on the right and other building silhouettes on the left. The overall palette is dark with gold/amber lighting accents and grunge/paint-splatter texture effects, giving it a dramatic, poster-like aesthetic.

Text in image: MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

A meme/captioned photo showing a man resembling Donald Trump, in a dark suit with a blue tie, walking at the front of a nighttime outdoor event. Behind and beside him are rows of young people dressed in light blue and white outfits, waving small American and Chinese flags together. Several men in suits (some appearing to be Chinese officials) walk near him. A bold black caption spans the top of the image on a white background.

Text in image: China Loves Trump

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

But you--you--is this Instagram? -Instagram, yeah. -You grammed this. You were walking down the beach. What happened? You were walking down the beach and you saw this on the beach? -Yeah, my wife and I, Patrice, were walking on the beach and saw those numbers in shells on the beach. -You didn't do this. Somebody else did this. -Yeah, somebody else did it. We were on a walk, preparing for this week, the roll-out of my book. She looked at it and said, "Why'd someone put their address in the sand?" -All right. 8,000 for you, Patrice. -And then we stood at it, looked at it, trying to figure out what it was, and she'd long been a server in restaurants, and she said, "You know what I think it is?" -Yeah. -"I think it's a reference to restaurants when you would 86 something in a restaurant." -Right, off the menu. -Yeah. I said, "Now, I remember as a kid, you'd say 86 to get out of a place. This place stinks, so let's 86 it." -Right, I was a bartender. You would 86 a customer if they were getting drunk. Like, that's 86 something. Like, give them a low-proof alcohol, something like that, yeah. -And so I said, "I think it's a clever political message." And she said, "You should take a picture of it." I said, "Sure." And then she said, "You should Instagram that." And boom. [Laughter]

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A political campaign-style graphic on a blue-to-red gradient background, bordered by a thin white rectangle. On the left is a close-up photo of Donald Trump with a stern/scowling expression, wearing a dark suit, white shirt, and blue tie. On the right is a photo of an older man with gray hair and glasses, wearing a dark suit jacket over a light blue shirt with no tie, smiling slightly. At the bottom center is a "TRUMP VANCE" campaign logo with stars and the slogan "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"

Text in image: REPUBLICAN NOMINEE FOR U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA KURT ALME WINS! ENDORSED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP! TRUMP VANCE ★★★★★ MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! ★★★★★

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

A meme/graphic with bold black text reading "Trump's America in 2026" above a photo of a large American flag with a gold eagle finial atop its pole, waving against a blue sky. Behind the flag, a dark stealth bomber (shaped like a B-2) flies low, and a fighter jet is visible banking in the upper right of the frame.

Text in image: Trump's America in 2026

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

We eventually broadcast a story about the Hunter Biden laptop after the midterm elections in 2022. We commissioned a forensic review. I got a copy of the laptop data. I have it here still. I went to a lot of effort to get the cleanest copy of the laptop data, the same data that was provided to the FBI, because I didn't want to have any professional journalistic risk for CBS News. I wanted this thing to be totally locked down. When we did the story, we did it after the midterms. I argued against that because it was ready before the midterms, and my training is that you should always do the story when it's ready to go. You should not be dictated by the political cycle. Once we got the laptop story on the morning news, I felt that there was so much there that we could still do. For example, in the text messages, there's unfortunately the use of the N-word, the liberal use of the N-word. I thought this was worthy of a story, but I was told that it was not something that interested CBS News. Then I asked for a forensic review of the laptop, and we found that there were more than half a dozen emails that were likely used by Joe Biden. I thought that was a story. The answer that came back was, "Well, we need to know what the content is of the emails," but that was going to be a years-long process. There were a lot of reasons I was told not to do it, not to pursue it. I spent a lot of my time at CBS following the Hunter Biden story. One of the things that really struck me is this kind of disconnect. I didn't understand how a senior executive like George Cheese could tell me that this was a high priority for the network and for his boss, and yet the executives at CBS News showed producers anchors could refuse that. I came to the conclusion that they must have felt that they were more powerful than George Cheese, which was astonishing to me. I'd never worked at a place where a directive from the top would be so defied.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A political campaign graphic with a blue-to-red gradient background and a white border. At the top, bold text announces a congressional election win. Below the text are two photos side by side: on the left, a close-up of Donald Trump with a serious/scowling expression, wearing a dark suit and blue tie; on the right, a younger man with light brown hair, smiling, wearing a dark suit, white shirt, and a striped blue tie with a small pin on his lapel. At the bottom center is a "TRUMP VANCE" campaign logo with stars and the slogan "MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"

Text in image: CONGRESSMAN (PA-14) GUY RESCHENTHALER WINS! ENDORSED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP! TRUMP VANCE ★★★★★ MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! ★★★★★

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

A promotional/political infographic styled like an official White House graphic, with "45|47" presidential seal-style emblems in the top corners on a dark navy banner. The headline reads "U.S. Poverty Rate At RECORD LOW". Below is a line chart titled "Official Poverty Rate, All People, 1959-2025" showing the U.S. poverty rate from roughly 1965 to 2025, fluctuating between about 10% and 22% over the decades, dipping sharply at the right end of the chart to around 8%. A red annotation reading "TRUMP Record-Low 10.2%" with a downward-pointing red arrow highlights the final segment of the line near 2023-2025.

Text in image: U.S. Poverty Rate At RECORD LOW 45 | 47 (x2, in seal emblems) Official Poverty Rate, All People, 1959-2025 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% TRUMP Record-Low 10.2% 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.