no backstop of actually being accountable to the public. i often think about the standard we should measure how well we are doing as a country is how thomas jefferson, george washington, alexander hamilton, john jay, john adams, how would they feel they're walking around washington d.c. today? these are men who deeply disagreed with a lot of questions will enjoy the founding of our public but they agree on one thing that at the very least the lawmakers and policymakers we elected should actually be the ones making public policy in this country. so, against that backdrop today i am here to announce how we will revive the promise of the constitutional republic with the three branches of government rather than four. that is the purpose of our meeting today. we are going to get into a level of detail that is to this point in the last half-century on

unprecedented which i believe will spawn nothing short of non- incremental reform a revival of the ideals of the american revolution and how we actually restore the constitutional republic. first, it will be a plan that reduces the size of the federal employee headcount by over 75% from the next president by the end of my next term but 50% of which is implementable by the end of year one. second, rescinding a majority, that is to say over 50% of federal regulations that fail the major questions doctrine at issue in west virginia versus epa. likely the most important supreme court case of a lifetime decided last year. the third, the president's power to use executive authority to shut down redundant federal agencies and to reorganize the

federal government accordingly. that is what we are going to talk about today. thank you. [applause] before we get into the details of the first five agencies we will shut down and the basis for rescinding a broad swath of federal regulations first most important worth understanding why it hasn't happened yet. this vision is not an original vision. i'll be the first to admit that. good presidents, excellent president from reagan to trump have spoken to the same idea i give credit to donald trump are taking more steps that have been taken in a generation and the direction with the schedule as the exceptions they began late in the terminated by many people in this room 3000 a step forward. but in order to get this job done we are going to have to confront several myths that have been perpetuated in this town by advisers and members of the very

bureaucracy we are looking to shut down but we're going to have to confront and overcome to understand how the u.s. president can actually get this job done right we are going to go through this today. the first ending a speech like this with the visuals so you will have to be patient and see how this goes. it's important to understand the specifics. the first myth is the president of the united states does not single-handedly have the ability to set what you would call the human resources policy the hiring and firing policies and the federal government. that view is wrong. the truth of the matter is that the u.s. president actually enjoys broad statutory authority to prescribe the rules of the civil service. if you want the citation turns out the president, i'm going to read from the u.s. code, may

prescribe such a regulation for the admission of individuals into the civil service of the executive branch that will best promote the efficiency of that service. now most federal employees work and was called in the competitive service. it turns out the rules governing the competitive service the ex-president are even broader pursuant to five usc 3302 that says u.s. present a similar power to i quote the law, prescribe rules governing the competitive service which includes most federal bureaucrats. what does that mean? the equivalent of working at a country. the hr department does not determine the rules without reporting it to the ceo. it works the same weight for the u.s. federal government as well. establish the u.s. president or pursuant to five usc 330 to sole

authority to set the regulations, the rules governing the office of personnel management. governing the competitive service. the myth number two has been taken for granted in our history as the president of the united states is limited in his ability to fire those employees pursuant to part of the u.s. code five usc 7513 a which creates so-called for cause limitations. or say the u.s. president cannot fire a bureaucrat unless it is that what you call for cause breaking the law, doing something egregious for that's a status quo in washington d.c. turns out that's actually a myth. [applause] it turns out large scale reductions in force are not

covered by the statute. they are covered by a different statute five usc 3502 reductions in force are subject only to 60 day requirements what you call the order of retention rules. the order in which you fire those employees. think about it. the logic makes sense. if there is an individual federal employee who may disagree with the next u.s. president or it may have different views than i do on abortion or gun control that works in the epa, these rules are designed to protect those employees. to protect the individual's politicized retribution like it or not that's what the service rules say. they do not apply to reductions in force large-scale mass layoffs. large-scale mass layoffs are absolutely what we will bring to

the d.c. bureaucracy. it is because it is necessary and it is sanctioned by the law of the united states of america. now, i believe getting into details but this is an occasion to dive deeper into the detail under the current rule rules governing how the employees are fired in large mass scale layoffs are governed by the office of personnel management and the opm rules. the current opm rules give that responsibility to agency heads. that is a fact. that raises the importance of making sure the u.s. president appoints agency heads in those roles who are prepared to should be a litmus test for and only serves in that cabinet level is prepared mass layoff large deduction is laid out the statute. however such agency head is unprepared to act on the job

recall the first point is the u.s. president has sole authority to set the rules governing the office of personnel management which it doesabsolute give the duly elecd president of the united states to single-handedly execute those large scale layoffs and mass reductions in force. this subverts the traditional wisdom said she was a present from reagan to trump on the last 40 years. but will be a necessary toolkit that says the ceo the leader of the executive branch does indeed have the authority to understand who is and is not hired in the executive branch. i will tell you this, speaking as a ceo of summit works for you and you cannot fire them, that means they do not work for you. that means you work for them because you are responsible for what they do without any authority to actually change it. but the beauty of this is our

law tracks this directly if we are willing to actually read the law in totality. so now, because this is important but will get a lot of pushback to this speech i have no doubt about it. i want to go to a common misconception that comes up for how this is able to occur. the next myth is that you are carrying out this mass layoffs, you still have to do it within the structure of the existing agencies as they continue to exist. that is actually false. the myth is the u.s. president does not have power to unilaterally reorganize a shut down federal agencies. it turns out the truth of the matter is the key provisions of the 1977 reorganization act are

still in effect. i am going to read to you 1977 act five usc 901 active lot today who thought it's worth paying attention to the words of the law itself. the president shall, the statute said that president may but this isn't one of them. the president shall from time to time examine the organization of all agencies and determine what changes in such organizations are necessary to carry out any policies set forth in the statute. what are the policies set forth in that statute? two examples for our purposes today. number one to reduce expenditures and promote the ecy to the fullest extent consistent with the efficient operation of the government. to reduce the number of agencies by consolidating those having similar functions under a single head and to abolish that's not

my word that's a word in the statute to abolish such agencies or function thereof as may be necessary for the efficient conduct of the government. this is not a suggestion to the u.s. president from congress. this is a mandate to the u.s. president from congress to exercise the authority. to reorganize and shut down the statue's words abolish such agencies if it promotes the economy. or in the alternative it eliminates redundant federal agencies. completely debunks the traditional mythology that the way the u.s. president has to act is by going to congress. part of the reason why and i'll show you here is after i remove the second truth what you are going to see is a myth this is a supreme court case i ns versus

jada that in 1984 dealt with the corrections 1977 act. this is arcane stuff but it is important to get to the bottom of what is going on. there could be a single house veto of a presidential reorganization pass with the supreme court held to be unconstitutional and that case was the single house veto. they said no, no you cannot a single house veto both chambers of congress but that's what they said misinterpreted that stops the u.s. president from acting unilaterally. the truth of the matter is those provisions that require the u.s. president to seek congressional consent, those provisions had deadlines. but the unexpired provisions that are still good on the books are the ones that actually

require, mandate the u.s. president to examine the efficient functioning of government from time to time. [applause] [cheering] so now we are going to get into the specifics of how this actually works. what agencies are we actually going to shut down and how? the final real myth here that we have got to pay attention to is this idea the administrative state as we know it is somehow an impartial management project that is able to take on what we the people cannot be trusted with. this is what is at stake here. it is a skepticism of we the

people and our ability to settle our differences on questions from climate change to racial injustice. the old world view was that people cannot be trusted. the people cannot be trusted you sort out the existential climate change. if we leave it to the people our planet is going to burn its way to pieces while systemically inequitable results among different races. this is what is baked in. it's the old world monster. reporter: gets ahead that is fundamentally skeptical of a self-governing people. but, will we actually have in this country is a constitutional in article two of the constitution clearly states the executive power shall be vested in a president of the united states. and the person whom we elect to run the executive branch. the u.s. president must actually

once again be the person who actually runs that executive branch of government. that is a final myth that once we debunked to have democratic accountability once again then pump us sitting in the white house that i worry today. instruments of administrative state. how do we then on the back of having debunked these myths how do we proceed step-by-step to taking on in dismantling that administrative state? how do we on the back of having to debunked these meds, how do we dismantle that state? it is a source of regulations.

what about the regulations already on the books. this is where west virginia versus epa comes in. so, this is likely the most important supreme court case of our lifetime when it comes to the ability to restore our constitutional republic. there are certain major policy questions. this is called the major questions doctrine that have to be decided by publicly elected representatives. those that serve in congress and those that serve in the u.s. senate. these cannot be delegated without express congressional authority. here there was a clean our plate they came from the epa

a majority quite likely an overwhelming majority of current federal regulations are unconstitutional under current

law in the united states of america. on day one, january 2025, it is the job and duty of the next president of the united states. to immediately resend the effectiveness of a majority of those federal regulations. i will give you a sense of how broadly that you actually spans from independent contractor regulations that obama had, trump rolled back, biden brought back. numbering in the hundreds of thousands if not millions, over 1 million across the country covered by these regulations that were passed in violation of the major questions doctrine based on the west virginia versus epa standard. e-cigarette regulations, driving more of them into the black market. like many regulations which do not match any statutory authority.

large cars versus small cars, emission standards, emission reporting by the sec. accredited investor standards saying who can and cannot invest in certain kind of companies. all of these failed the major questions doctrine based on the impact that they have on a family. $2000 per family itself is unconstitutional in the scope of impact, literally, an overwhelming majority of these federal regulations are on their way to being rescinded during the first days of an administration that actually understands what is going on when it comes to the unconstitutional administrative state. so that is the first element. undo the damage that is already been done by rescinding the federal regulations already on the books. now it has come to actually how we, not only resend the regulations that congress never

authorized, how about actually rescinding the existence of bureaucratic agencies that congress never authorized. i will start with an agency that too many people surprise was not despite getting appropriations yearly was not authorized by congress. let's talk about the fbi. this is an agency, if i make a book recommendation, i like to write books but also like to read them from time to time. g-man. such a great book. a yale historian. laying out the history of j edgar hoover's ministry in the fbi. how this was an institution created to be corrupt from the beginning. the same one used to threaten martin luther king jr. into suicide now being used to target political opponents of a different persuasion.

a bureaucracy that sits in between a doj, local prosecutors at the local level and say police enforcement like the u.s. marshals which have not been corrupted in the same way as the fbi. this is what the situation looks like today. that is the status quote. in more detail plans for easier, using a short version, there will be more detailed versions up on vivek 2024.com. this is deeply pragmatic. take the 35,000 employees at the fbi. 20,000 of them are in nonessential functions. back-office roles many of whom poured into a ball building names. i am not making it up. the jade kirk building here in washington, d.c. they will find honest work in

the private sector. 15,000 of those employees will be reorganized into the u.s. marshals, into the financial crimes enforcement network at the u.s. treasury. into other parts, the dea taking part of the drug enforcement problems that we have in this country. part of the problem when you have a bureaucracy that runs this deep, they find things to do that they should not have been doing in the first place. what happened with the fbi as they took on counterterrorism to child sex trafficking to financial crimes and white collar enforcement. they had no specialization in the first place. at once, less effective than actually enforcing the laws on the books. while also creating the formula for the corruption that we now suffer today. this is where i think we face a choice. do you want incremental reform or recognize that it is actually

the underlying machine that was the source of the corruption itself. i believe that the only correct answer to restore the integrity of our law enforcement apparatus would be to begin with shutting down an institution like the fbi it self. we will move to the next institution. the u.s. department of education this is an agency that spends approximately an $80 billion budget per year telling local schools that they cannot those federal funds unless they adopt toxic racial and gender ideologies. denying federal funding. about 10-11% of the schools budget that dared to teach kids how to engage in hunting or teach them how to practice archery. those have been the basis while telling other schools that they

cannot get actual federal funding unless they adopt toxic ideologies. this is an institution that is driven the epidemic of inflation in college tuition costs while subsidizing four-year college degrees not doing basically a thing for people that want to do one year vocational programs. the fact that the federal government should have never been involved in local education in the first place. so, remember one of the bases for the u.s. president is shut down an agency promoting the economy and efficiency. taking that and giving it back to the people meets at statutory test and that is why we will not just put a good person. i respect people that have served in that role. we will actually get in there and shut it down while moving certain of the remaining functions like loan collections

to the u.s. department of treasury, that limited to the department of labor. that is how you actually drive change. i will go quickly through a sample of the remaining agencies that we will shut down in the same way. the three letter agency that has stood in the way of nuclear energy in this country. we have the only country in the world that does this is china. we have very few jen three reactors. sixty plus years old which are less safe in the name of an agency before its existence. now the average time is 25-40 years in france it is five-eight falls at the feet of what brooke talked about at the very beginning. the administrative state.

this was never passed through congress. it is fundamentally the culture of an agency that believes it should not be on the united states. what we say is you cannot reform an agency with that culture. you have to get in there and shut it down. move a small number of the remaining employees to the doe and other parts of the government where they can use the expertise to promote actual innovation and nuclear energy in the united states. we will conclude this one. this is just the beginning of the federal agencies shot down or downsized by 75% or more. take the atf. here i want to recognize matt gates. a piece of legislation.

january of this year defunded the atf and cause it to abolish its existence. 500 plus people competing interests that are not actually able to properly oversee an administrative stay to the duly elected chief executive of the country which is why as a new u.s. president will shut down the bureau of alcohol to and store firearms. one of those that have been most toxic of funds. this is one where, and i quote, within the agency and office of personnel management itself, this is so corrupt that this is their words not mine. total disregard for federal

human capital management laws regulations policies and practices. an agency reaching beyond its constitutional scope. the correct answer is we will get in there and you are seeing a pattern here. that is how you have a constitutional republic. if you want to look at tracing in to the secret service agencies that have not yet been corrupted. this begins to give you at least a preview of what the new administration starting january 2025 can actually begin to deal. i am running to lead that movement for country but it will not happen. it is a one-man show. every one of us to every citizen in this country has to play a

role in reviving our country. i want to recognize people in this room that worked hard starting in 2020 that i think are a key part, a key step in beginning to reclassify federal employees to open up the possibility of firing. what i am suggesting now is the next president of the united states now needs to go further and having a personal conviction that these laws are unconstitutional, that the regulations passed pursuant or not pursuant to those laws are also unconstitutional and have the spine to ensure that we have one executive branch in the united states of america. i think that that is a choice that we face at this juncture. do we want incremental reform or do we want revolution? i stand on the side of a revival

of those 1776 ideals. a revival of that idea that, yes , we the people created government then accountable to us, not the other way around. this is what unites us as americans. this is personal to me. i grew up into that generation where we were taught to celebrate our diversity and differences so much that we forgot all of the ways we are really the same as americans bound by that common set of ideals. meaning from many one. that is the dream that one the american revolution. that is the dream that reunited us after the civil war.

that is the dream that one us two world wars and the cold war. that is the drain that still gives hope to the free world and if we can provide that dream over group identity and domestic monarchy, then nobody in the world, not a nation, not a corporation, not a virus, not a three letter government agency will defeat us. that is what american exceptionalism is all about. that is what we together will revive to save this great nation thank you all for coming today, may god bless you. god bless your family send god bless our united states of america. thank you. [applause]

>> as a mother of four children i can appreciate will get this all cleaned up. as they are flipping the stage up here we will bring a couple chairs up and we will have a fun conversation. how about one more round of applause for the vision, the inspiration, just an incredible mind behind this how about a round of applause for the stage switchers. that was perhaps the most impressive thing. thank you. as i mentioned in the introduction, the path that you have chosen, where burdens next year or four years later or wherever it is, it is very clear , i am animated when i think about our country. it was not thousands of people, it was a handful of committed patriots that refused to give up

i think it is in a way very similar to where we are today. a handful of committed patriots can truly say they country and change a trajectory of america so god bless you for answering the call. it is really fun to watch you out in america on this journey that you have chosen. recently i saw a video of you speaking to a senior in high school. to be willing to be a contrarian the journey that you have endeavored many would say it is against the pack in the best way so, what advice and how has the advice you shared with this young man, how has it led to where you are today?

>> this is a distinctly american view, by the way. so, for me, being willing to take risks and to fail is a core part of how you actually get to success. i think that that is part of the founding spirit of this country as well in some ways that we have lost. we talked about 1776 earlier. i think we live in a 1776 moment and i think it must've been the same young man if i am remembering the conversation you saw correctly. i told them you don't know how old thomas jefferson was that she was in his 30s. thirty-three years old. he not only wrote the declaration of independence, he invented the swivel chair while he was writing the declaration of independence because he felt like he needed it to think. that is the swivel chair we sit in today. benjamin franklin who is one of the cosigners the franklin stove

and remedy to the cove, what do we say today? that is for the technocrats. it belongs to the technocracy. that is actually something you cannot do and if you dare to do it in fail, we will punish you for it. and, so, part of the journey that i've taken is one where i have taken calculated risks, i have not succeeded every time, but i have succeeded more times than i have failed. i want to create a country where every kid has the space and self-confidence to actually be able to do the same thing. it sounds like it's a different topic, but it is not really. an inner animal spirit in the heart of the american soul that has been domesticated or tamed.

by this new cancer that penalizes the pursuit of excellence and celebrates victimhood and limitation instead. our culture, our animal, that has left oceans to lift up places like china. their culture and even stifling technocracy that has leapt back to hold us back. i think many of us rallied behind dekraai to make america great again, that is what i think we actually hungered for. the unapologetic pursuit of excellence in this country. that is what it means to be an american and, yes, part of it is if the pack goes that way, you go that way as long as you know you are actually right. be contrary and be right. that is my advice to every entrepreneur. that is my advice to this

country. that is how i will lead if i run this country as well. >> well said. for those of us watching, for all the cameras in the back, those of us sitting here that were in the last administration and in the last white house, it is interesting. when i agreed to go in and year two and stayed for the final three years and plan to stay longer, i had a lot of people tell me it is a lost cause. government of america is just out of control. you can make little changes around the margins, but there is no way to pull it back in. so when i left texas, moved to washington, join the white house , i think i speak on behalf of a lot of those from our administration that are here, i did not know what to expect. we had a businessman in the oval office. i knew he challenges team to swing for the fences every day. i will tell you when i left i was actually more encouraged

than i'd ever been in my life in 20 plus years of public policy. this country can be saved. two do it, you have to think big , you have to have a very intentional and purposeful plan and you have to be willing to be contrarian and go against the pack. as you lay this out in the next few days or weeks or months, you will probably be told a lot that what you just out late here will not work. how do you plan to manage that and prepare whether you are the next white house or whoever it is, i am assuming a part of the next plan and what that looks like, how do you, vic ramaswamy and your team get ready to move forward on these big ideas we are talking about? >> i do think it takes a unique combination from the top. that is part of what caused me into this journey. an outsider who has, may i say complete and total restrict -- disregard for washington, d.c.

there is a risk that the members of the managerial class. proliferating like a cancer in our universities. telling them that they cannot do the same managerial class. the swamp exists in parts of the private sector two. parallel counterpart to the deep state. some people feel the same physicians in alternating years in both. i think it requires leaders that are grounded at the top and conviction. if you are a ceo, what is the purpose of your company. if your ceo of the executive

branch of the government, what is the purpose of leading in the federal government and what all you not be doing as well? there is no doubt that there will be, i see a lot of cameras in the room, maybe it is already begun, laying out all the reasons why they are infeasible and not grounded in the right legal authority or otherwise. the first thing is i like to be grounded in strong principal. the current supreme court which as i said, i give trump a lot of credit for, i think we went six- three on pretty much every legally contested question that i laid out in the prior speech. the current supreme court, the supreme court that gave us west virginia versus epa i think backs me up six-three on every legal question on exactly how we will use executive authority to shut down the deep state. you have to know you are playing the winning hand, like any negotiation. you play the hand you have.

i think we have the winning hand with the supreme court that we do now. and then you have to think about guided by your purpose. it is not that i have a vendetta against any of these individuals who are working in these agencies, to the contrary, just good people. individual people living their lives privately and their families. this is no personal animus. it is the machine that is the source of that probably. when you view it that way, guided by that purpose of why it is you are doing what you are doing rather than animus or vengeance, i think we actually go further with our own agenda. i think it is a combination of knowing at the supreme court we have that winning hand, but at the same time being guided by a purpose that is bigger than one man. bigger than me. i give trump credit for giving us the supreme court. winning six-three. actually, the next guy who comes after me or gal or whoever it is

does not have his or her hands tied in the same way that the next presidents will appear to be in january 20. that is something i would encourage all of us to think about. our america first movement. and it is our movement. it is bigger than anyone of us. we are each playing our role in driving this change. we have to start thinking about how we are driving change on the timescales of history. not just two or four year election cycles. in the interplay between what the next president can do backstop by what the supreme court the prior president gave us, this is how we drive that change on the timescale of history. so, like you in 2020, brooke, that is why i am also deeply optimistic about our ability to actually see this through. just take some people willing to take that risk actually getting that job done. >> well said.

one thing that i think is important to note, i would love your thoughts on this, as conservatives, america first conservatives especially, i think we have awakened a country and when you pull the policies that we believe in, whether it is securing the border or parents having the right to choose their children school or, you know, raising them in the way they see fit or piece through strength internationally or a healthcare system where the patient chooses, not the government, i could go on and on when you take those ideas out into the country, 85% of americans agree with us. i think, you know, we talk about how divided we are as a country, we are on one side or the other. i do not see that as much. i am curious of your thoughts that will be lead on policy we went because the american people are with us. have you seen that in the last few months?

>> probably the top the most positive surprise with traveling the country. we are not nearly as divided as we are taught to believe by media or social media or otherwise. one of the things may be against better advice from a political goal perspective that i've done, i just think it's important is to show up in places like the southside of chicago or kensington in the middle of the inner city of philadelphia. i have talked with people in west maui. i have not talked to zelinski, but i did talk to people in west maui. one of the things that i see is common cause. when it comes to the border. i probably have not been in a room of people who were more vehemently and favor of my proposal to use the u.s. military to secure the southern border and a group of people on the southside of chicago whose own school, high school, south

shore high school is being converted into an encampment for migrants costing $7000 per migrant per month when people in that community rightly ask a fair question, what about me in that context. many of them disagree with me. i was challenged on this. i will be transparent about that on racial reparations. most people who are in that room , it seemed like or at least a lot of them it seemed like disagree with me vehemently on that, but we agreed on the america first principles. so my learning from that that i would share to the extent that this is helpful for all of us in our movement is, i think that we have to walk the walk when it comes to thinking about america first principles in a way that go beyond traditional partisan boundaries. the way that i'm looking at this is no state behind. no city left behind. no american left behind.

this is a multiethnic working-class coalition putting partisan boundaries behind them. putting this country first. advancing our economy. shutting down the administrative state. keeping us out of world war iii. revive national pride. these are not democrat ideas are republican ideas if we have the courage to actually stop viewing them through those partisan filters. by the way, a speech like this one, here that i'm giving today, a week from today, i think it's actually next thursday, i will say it here, similar speeches that relate to our foreign policy and taking and questioning certain assumptions. we are taught to believe that it is impossible, economically devastating to the united states to actually declare industrial and economic dependence from china. we will do it in central ohio. happens to be my hometown.

also a place where we are actively on shoring a lot of production here to the united states in ways that do not have to be nearly as harmful as we are taught to believe. it is our job to talk to everybody. we cannot talk about free speech and echo chambers. what i found was, i think your polls are saying the same thing, greeted with a lot more agreement and then talk about the how. all kinds of myths. myths related to cutting down the administrative state. similar to what will happen to the economy if we actually bear to declare dependence from china just like we did today we will debunk a lot of the myths. the movement that reunites this country, black, white, red, blue , it does not matter. we are all american in the job of the u.s. government in the duly elected president is to put the interest of those americans, all americans first again.

i think that is something we can do to reunite this nation and i am optimistic about what i see. >> i could not agree with you more. i think that that is exactly right. [applause] let's kind of clothes with your thoughts on my next statement. it directs relate directly to what you just outlined today with the bureaucracy. and that is in 2015, i and others have been working in the movement for a long time, deregulation, deconstruction of the administrative state, in the minds of sort of the leaders of the movement that is been front and center. in the minds of americans, it was very low on the pole of issues that they cared about. six, seven, eight years ago. i will never forget when then candidate donald trump came down the escalator and started talking about draining the swamp caught the imagination of a nation. i remember being so encouraged that there is a way to break

through to the american people that this idea from the political class, a political consultant saying you can only talk in 32nd soundbites and you cannot go deep on some of these policies because you will lose the boat or whatever, i think that that was proven wrong the last time around because now draining the swamp and deconstructing is a top issue for americans. but you, particularly, have a talent to take complex issues and really go deep and explain them to the american people. have you found that the american in the middle of ohio that they are open and willing and interested in understanding truly what is at stake and truly how to fix it. >> i will be very candid about this. i am embarrassed to say that this was a surprise to me, but it was a surprise to me, if i am being very honest.

i've been educated at top institutions, university, law school, all of that. i am in touch with many of my former peers. i have not received questions as intelligent about central-bank digital currencies or about the relationship between the u.s. dollar and the likely new currency being formed by bricks nations paid to the gold standard. my former colleagues at hedge funds in new york from harvard college to yale law school, as i have gotten, from people who were farmers in iowa or people that live within a 50-mile radius from where i live in central ohio today. that is deeply encouraging. that is the founding spirit i was talking about. thomas jefferson and george washington, they were not traditionally college-educated founding fathers either. i think that that level of curiosity right now is, at least in my lifetime as i've seen in this country, at an all-time high. that is a good thing. why is that?

the last eight years people have been taught that the media is completely not to be trusted. the information you are fed, we know we have been burned, and i will be bipartisan about this weapons of mass destruction in iraq to the basis for the 2008 bailout for the russian collusion hoax that never was, to the origin of covid to the hunter biden laptop story that was suppressed on the eve of election to now however money is being spent in ukraine. people now say, okay, fool me once or twice or thrice or seven times shame on me but fool me a times, you won't. i think that that is created a hunger where what people, i hate that term middle america, but we refer to middle america independently consuming information that is grounded in fact, reason, logix, skepticism of what they are fed. and boys have an opportunity for us right now. it is like the 1776 moment that we live in and this is where i

see the day lights between what i think of as an old gop and the america first movement. it is a methodology question. i get this advice, too. the number one piece of advice that i get steel from people giving me political advice, good people, thoughtful is simple at the fire. you've got to dumb it down, make it simple or llc you will not win this election. the way i view it as there is a betrayal involved in that because the threat that we face are complex right now. it would be a form of allied to oversimplify that. i would rather lose an election and speak the truth and somehow when by getting people pull tested slogans. thomas soul i think had an inspiring quote, i cannot remember when it was. was a long time ago. what he said was, if you care about someone you tell them the truth. if you care about yourself, you tell them what they want to hear

and i think that this is why the gop did not succeed in 2022. the thing that pulled well was biden's agenda doing poorly, criticized biden, biden three- five times, as many times as you can in a thirty second sound bite and that is how you win because that is what the polls tell you. i think what people are hungry,e alternative vision, actually. a vision of our own. i have not mentioned biden one time in the hour and a half we have spent together now. i think that we need to get in the habit of that because, first of all, pursuant to the discussion we just had, he is not the person running the federal government anyway. it is a puppet. so you are missing the point if you obsess over one person. i think part of the america first movement, i think it is a powerful movement beyond just a political partisan tug-of-war between the gop and the

democrats is actually having a vision of, first of all, to put america first, we have to define what america is. once we define what it is, we have our vision that we actually put first above everything else. and i think that that will be a formula for not just winning elections and landslides although i think we can do that in 2024, but for reuniting a country that is beneath the surface far more united than we will give it credit for. the thing i will sort of say in closing from my part at least, brooke, people say, you know, one of the criticisms that i still get is you are too young to be doing this. i was 37 at the start. i turned 38 last month. i believe in addressing critics. go back to thomas jefferson. he was 33 when he wrote the declaration of independence. think about our country. the only thing that i will say

in our movement, where want to see us, speaking amongst friends here i do not want our america first movement to be one that accepts that we have to be a nation in decline. we are taught to believe it, it is easy to believe it. i understand why you might believe that the we do not have to be a nation in decline. i think as a nation, we are all really just a little young, actually. going through our own version of collective adolescents fear figuring out who we are really going to be when we grow up. and, when you view it that way, at least for me, it starts to make sense again. you go through your adolescents, you lose your way a little bit. you lose your self-confidence. you lose your sense of who you really are. but, we are stronger for it when

we get to our adulthood on the other side. yes, we go through that identity crisis, that national identity crisis, but we can be stronger for it once we get through it. and, so, no is my answer. we do not have to be ancient rome. we do not have to be that nation in decline. i think we can still yet be a nation in our ascent. maybe the early stages of our ascent, actually. maybe we are not even yet at base camp. on our way to the country, to that mountaintop, to that nation where we can still tell our kids , we want to tell them in good conscience that the united states of america is still that

country where no matter who you are or where your parents came from or what your skin color is, or how long your last name is in some of our cases, that you still get ahead in this country with your own hard work. your own commitment. your own dedication and that you know that you are free to speak your mind at every step of the way and that the people who you elect to run the government are the ones who actually run the government. that is the american dream. that is what i think we have to stop running from. we need to run to. and that is due to the hard work of many people in this room, i am confident that we will revive to save this great nation. thank you all for having me and i appreciate it. >> amen. [applause] >> vivek, you are an inspiration

i will jt close us, if you don't mind,ethi from scripture. proverbs 11 : 14. se leadership but a nationout succndtands in victory when it has many good counselors to gde it. god bless you being one of those counselors and god bless you f bng in their arena. thank you all for joining us today. thank you. [applause] >> on thursday secretary nominee brooke rlins appears that her confirmation hearing befor the senate agriculture committee. she served as aing director and was a presidentia aide during the first trump administration. you can watch live coverage starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three. c-span our free mobile app or online at c-span.org. >> live thursday on c-span. the house meets at 10:00 a.m. eastern for legislative business

later in the dayoat on a wildfire prevention and forest management bill. and on abortion lislation. on c-span2 a 10, members of the senate are expected to vote on the nomination of john radcliffe to be cia director and continue debate on pete hegseth's nomination to be defense secretary. senate lawmakers could vote later in the week on whether to confirm mr. hegseth. after new allegations about misconduct and abuse have surfaced. on see pam three, trump's pick for agriculture secretary former white house aide brooke rollins. we will take question at a senate agriculture committee confirmation. 10:00 a.m. eastern. you can also watch all of our live coverage on the c-span now video out. or online at c-span.org. ♪♪ democracy. it is not just an idea, it is a process. a process shaped by leaders elected to the highest